# Another ATA 5 year old black belt



## RonMarlow

http://newstimes.augusta.com/stories/2011/09/25/spo_628051.shtml


----------



## clfsean

Oh fercrissakes... :barf:


----------



## Twin Fist

seriously?


----------



## Bill Mattocks

I'm going to introduce a set of training videos that beam the video and sound into the womb via ultrasound.  That way, your child can be born a black belt.  Why wait?


----------



## NSRTKD

Bill Mattocks said:


> I'm going to introduce a set of training videos that beam the video and sound into the womb via ultrasound.  That way, your child can be born a black belt.  Why wait?


You could supplement that with calisthenic training and forms done by the mother while nursing, moving the babe's arms and legs while watching the instructional videos. Baby could be 2nd Dan by weaning.


----------



## Thesemindz

On the one hand, I'm glad this kid's parents have him doing karate instead of eating doughnuts. Even if it's just ATA, at least he's moving around and staying active and learning how to be a better person from the very beginning. That could really have an incredibly positive effect on the rest of that kid's life. I'd much rather have kids doing questionable air karate with a healthy dose of respect/focus/self discipline/constant improvement than have kids sitting around on the couch sucking down high fructose corn syrup and being told that they're stupid and will never amount to anything.

On the other hand, I bet I could kick his little black belt *** in a fight. So you have to put it all in perspective.

Maybe this is just the beginning of a lifetime of study and practice and dedication to martial arts. I wish I'd started when I was five years old. His story isn't written yet, it's only beginning. Maybe seventy years from now he'll be the most respected TKD Master in the world. Personally, I wouldn't give a black belt to anyone under sixteen, and even then I don't really think they can begin to truly understand karate until they grow into their adult body. But it really depends on what "black belt" stands for. To me, it stands for "well educated bad ***," and I don't know any five year olds that fit either of those criteria. But with no universal standard, what it means to me has no bearing on what it means to another instructor. Maybe in that school it means "pays his dues on time."


-Rob


----------



## Buka

His Senseis either no NOTHING about Martial Arts, or just don't care. I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and guess the former.


----------



## ETinCYQX

As much as this used to bug me, I find myself more and more indifferent. I know what my black belt means, I know what the belts I give out mean, I'm happy.


----------



## msmitht

Wow. I never liked their particular approach to taekwondo. The schools are run well and well managed. The class schedules I have seen are well put together. The techniques I have seen are not kukkiwon, itf or older kwan system standards. The sparring now resembles a very poor naska point system and really, really bad mma. They are no longer worth my thoughts, time and words. They should not be allowed to call themselves taekwondo if they allow a 5 year old to wear a black belt. Sadly there are wtf/itf schools that do it as well....but not as many and not overseas. It devalues all martial arts ranking structure's when instructors do this.I'm done with posts about ATA!


----------



## DSMartialArts

I agree with the fact of progression and earning another belt. He been studying for 2 years that is kinda quick for a black belt. I studied Tang Soon Do for almost 3 years and only earned green belt would have tested for red which is a step below black which you held for at least a year. If the kids earns 2nd Dan by age 6 it is ludicris. If his parents paid then for it they want to see results.

Sent from my Samsung Fascinate using Tapatalk


----------



## Carol

Kid earned a black belt in less than 2 years.  At this rate he'll be a 2nd dan before he's six.


----------



## Thesemindz

ETinCYQX said:


> As much as this used to bug me, I find myself more and more indifferent. I know what my black belt means, I know what the belts I give out mean, I'm happy.



This.


-Rob


----------



## dancingalone

Meh, not my cup of tea, but at least the owner is upfront about what black belt means in her school.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FONT=verdana, arial, sans-serif][FONT=verdana, sans-serif]For ATA, she said achieving each new belt -- and eventually earning a black belt -- is all about *personal progression*.

  "We don't say, 'The standard of a black belt is this' or 'In order to  be a black belt, you must be able to do this,' " Prazer said. "Because  then only a small part of the population would even be able to reach  that."

  Instead, she said* it's about consistently reaching goals and progressing based on the individual's abilities*.

[/FONT][/FONT]


----------



## miguksaram

dancingalone said:


> Meh, not my cup of tea, but at least the owner is upfront about what black belt means in her school.
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> For ATA, she said achieving each new belt -- and eventually earning a black belt -- is all about *personal progression*.
> 
> "We don't say, 'The standard of a black belt is this' or 'In order to  be a black belt, you must be able to do this,' " Prazer said. "Because  then only a small part of the population would even be able to reach  that."
> 
> Instead, she said* it's about consistently reaching goals and progressing based on the individual's abilities*.


One problem with this statement is what goals do you set for the kid after he obtains his black belt?


----------



## dancingalone

miguksaram said:


> One problem with this statement is what goals do you set for the kid after he obtains his black belt?



I imagine the same as with any other style that has multiple black belt ranks.  The higher ranks provide a progression path if they are linked to some objective measure of achievement.  Personally, I'd rather see schools deemphasize belt ranks in favor of actual physical performance, but we're well past that in the martial arts world unfortunately.


----------



## JohnEdward

It is like having a kindergardener  being awarded a high school diploma, after finishing. I say this based on the original intentions and design of  the modern day belt ranking system of Jigoro Kano.  A second grader who can 

What are the possible consistent goals achieved that are expected a child earning a black belt represents? What level of personal progress is expect of a kid with a black belt and an adult with a black belt. Put that in real world terms, it is like saying a 5 year CEO can run a company as effectively as an experienced adult.  Heck everyone is entitled to be a CEO, aren't they? Otherwise they aren't any.  Once we past the BS, it really is about the appeasement of Uberparents willing to pay $$$$ to ornament their child further them as a parental project as being more special than the others,reflected in the parents personal issues.  Many TKD dojangs  have become nothing more than uberparent pandering operations. Teaching kids is now where the money is at, and thus the degradation of the art. Hell, for the right amount of $$$$ after 3 years award them Master rank. Because than a large population is able to reach it, even toddlers.


----------



## Cyriacus

In some Ways, I Disagree with this.

In other Ways, I only Care because its Dangerous for the Practitioners.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

Carol said:


> Kid earned a black belt in less than 2 years.  At this rate he'll be a 2nd dan before he's six.



No worries, in a few years he will quit and play soccer or some thing else.  Then when he is at the bar in his twenties he will tell people hey I am a black belt I used to practice. (used being the opperative word here)  If their standards are so low, so be it.  However, they cannot expect the rest of us to honor them or their rank!


----------



## NSRTKD

Does anyone actually know the requirements of making black belt for this particular 5 year old? 

My 5 year old is about as graceful as a drunken giraffe, so I can't imagine her making a black belt before her teens, and that's not our "style" in our school anyways. My 5 year old has a striped yellow belt, and I have refused to let her test because in terms of technique, she's only at the level of a striped yellow belt, and barely, regardless of the fact that she remembers all the material. In our school, even a 5 year old has to retain all the previous forms and techniques taught and complete 13 one-steps plus know the meanings of all the forms and belts passed thus far. My daughter can do that, but because her kicks AT her belt level and below still look very beginner (I'm NOT saying this to be unsupportive and mean, and of course don't say things to her rudely, just being honest about the coordination of a 5 year old body) she hasn't earned a green belt, so I haven't let her test. I plan to let her test soon, since she is working hard and, now that she has mastered the forms, is very focused on technique (for a 5 year old), but if she earns her green belt (around the time she turns 6), she will stay there for quite a while, I imagine - possibly a year until I let her go for stripes, if she seems ready. She might surprise me, but it's my duty to hold her back when she wants to move faster than she is ready for, or when any instructor wants her to rank higher than she deserves.

What I'm getting at with this is that each child advances based on his/her ability, but I think it's also partly the parents' responsibility to teach their children NOT to get hung up on ranking at each testing, and encouraging the child to focus on correct technique before allowing the kid to test. As much as our instructors are in charge, ultimately, I'm the one who pays for testing, so if I pay for her to test clearly before she is ready, I'm partly at fault too, when she wears the next belt and faces endless frustration because she wasn't ready.

For my 5 year old, reverse side kicks are a huuuuge challenge. So would it be fair for me to let her test just because she can throw one successfully in front of the judges, or should I make her wait until she is confident in every (or most, at least) reverse side kick she throws, and no longer gets frustrated with herself over them?

My daughter is also a great singer, but should I put her in a broadway show or let her sing for the family at holidays? One will teach her that people love her performances and that she is awesome at it, and the other teaches her the very same thing without giving her nowhere "up from here" to go. I believe in equipping my children to make their own success when they are old enough to appreciate it, rather than giving them the illusion of success based on what I have paid for. 

So while I guess, having not seen the requirements of the school and not seeing this particular "black belt" in action, I can't really say he doesn't deserve it for sure (although it's hard to say otherwise, really), I think it's important to remember that while the school is allowing this progression, the parents are obviously encouraging it too, and partly at fault. The public needs better education about what having a black belt means, and the parents need to think about not letting their children advance until they can comprehend the amount of work put into a black belt. This kid may (I have no crystal ball, it's just a guess) grow up and expect that he can earn everything faster and younger than everybody else, and be both disappointed in the world and disgruntled with his parents for providing him with false expectations.


----------



## dancingalone

As someone with a niece and nephew in the exact same organization, I wouldn't assume that the parents are ignorant about the nature of the school they have chosen. 

I think the parents know what they are paying for:  a fun physical activity for the little one with some reinforcement of positive character traits.  They KNOW their kid isn't learning to be a hardened warrior, and they want it that way, frankly.  They think of belt ranks like Cub Scout merit badges - this might be offensive to hard core martial artists like many of us are - but that's the reality of it, and honestly we're outnumbered at this point.  The winners of any 'war' get to write the history, so who is to say the merit badge interpretation won't be the 'right' one in the future?

I mean we have 1 year black belt programs in Korea after all.  It's fun to bash crap like this this, and I've done my share, but it really doesn't mean much unless we're willing to speak up when people in our own areas of influence do it themselves.


----------



## dancingalone

Having said this:  "I mean we have 1 year black belt programs in Korea after all. "

I wanted to note before anyone jumps in with Chuck Norris or Joe Lewis earned their black belts in a short period - different situations altogether.  I have no real issues with adult SOLDIERS taking an abbreviated path to a black belt if they have mastered the requirements while undoubtedly proving their fitness for the rank through sparring bouts with other good fighters.


----------



## Steve

I don't see anything wrong with it.  I mean, from what I've heard, the adult ATA black belts can't defend themselves, either.  So, at least the grading is consistent.


----------



## granfire

stevebjj said:


> I don't see anything wrong with it.  I mean, from what I've heard, the adult ATA black belts can't defend themselves, either.  So, at least the grading is consistent.



Meany!


----------



## NSRTKD

Dancingalone: I bet the parents of that school find parents like me completely barbaric and absolutely no fun at all! Lol


----------



## dancingalone

Probably.  Like I said my sister knows there is a difference between my school and the school to which she sends her kids to.  It serves the exact niche she wants and there's something to be said for that, I guess.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

The problem is that there exists no universal standard for any level, particularly black belt.  Certainly not within the arts as a whole (specifically arts that use the Dan/Kyu or Dan/Gup system).  And certainly not even within the same art.  Let us use TKD as a prime example since this is the TKD section of the board.  Within the broad label of TKD we have major factions such as the KKW, ITF, ATA, USTA etc (some larger than others of course).  Then we have independent, old school, traditional and eclectic as smaller sub-factions.  None of them necessarily agree with each other on number of Gup levels, order of belt colors, TIG to BB etc.  Now let us go even further into just one faction; we'll use the KKW as an example.  As many have stated before, children in Korea can reach BB in about a year.  Some children here in the U.S. (and other countries) apparently can reach it in about a year as well as we've seen in many of these threads.  

Now...

Some may say that Korean children train 5 days a week and other children in other countries train twice a week, yet make BB in the same amount of time.  Does this mean Korean kids are better because they may get more training or worse since other kids get there quicker?  This is the catch-22.  One can take either position and offer rationalization to support that position.  But it all reverts down to this;  by what universally recognized standard are you using?  And since one doesn't exist...well it makes for great chit-chat on the boards but nothing will ever get solved either way.

I'll say this as an example;  I don't think a kid below the age of maybe 16 needs to be a BB or whatever alternate name one wishes to use.  BB is a milestone in one's training, achieved through dedication, hard work and even practical life experience.  I don't see a five-year old as having done that.  And in my further opinion, schools of this ilk are simply kiddie karate daycare that cater to the all-mighty dollar.  That's my position.

However...

I can only base this on personal opinion.  Since no universally recognized or accepted standard exists it is all a moot point.  There will never be a universally recognized or accepted standard as there are too many people of lax standards that are in it for something other than the arts themselves (read money).  It would take the heads of almost every martial arts organization (large and small) having a summit and agreeing upon a standard and writing it in stone and them following it.  Anyone see this happening?

So the bottom line is that BB is a personal thing that really only means something to the individual earning it and perhaps within their circle of training and influence.  Beyond that it gets very nebulous.  And ultimately, that is very unfortunate.  Perhaps the Dan/Kyu and Dan/Gup system have outlived their purpose and usefulness?  But that is the subject of another thread.


----------



## Em MacIntosh

Impressions of what a BB is differ from person to person.  That goes without saying.

I know what it means to me, I realize there's no set standard and don't expect others to have the same impression.  That goes without saying.

If a parent wants to inflate their child I disagree with it but that's their business until there's quality control applied to these things.

Based on the video he appears to be a yellow belt that is missing some of the fundamentals.


----------



## NSRTKD

Question... in ATA, are the blue/red stripes a sign of being a junior instructor trainee? Thats what those stripes imply in my style, HTF, though I can't imagine a 5 year old being a junior instructor trainee. That's an awful lot of pressure for 5.


----------



## dancingalone

naomisarah said:


> Question... in ATA, are the blue/red stripes a sign of being a junior instructor trainee? Thats what those stripes imply in my style, HTF, though I can't imagine a 5 year old being a junior instructor trainee. That's an awful lot of pressure for 5.



They have various levels of "instructor certification".  People in the stages of earning them wear differently colored collars on their uniforms to denote the status.  The first level used to be a red collar although now I think they let 'Leadership' students wear that too.  They're big on the uniform bling - hard to keep up with that stuff unless you're actually in the ATA.  My niece was a State Champ in their organization and she got to buy a uniform just for that purpose with the recognition boldly lettered on the back of her dobok.


----------



## dancingalone

Got a clarification.  The blue/red stripes means he is a 'junior leadership' student.  People with ATA instructor program recognition wear a black/red collar or a black/red/black collar or a simple black collar depending on their instructor stage.


----------



## NSRTKD

Ah! Thanks for that. Do you know what's differently required for a leadership student versus a non-leadership student?

See in our school, the blue/white/red means "junior instructor trainee" and the solid red means "senior instructor trainee" while a solid black is "certified instructor"...


----------



## hungryninja

In the ATA, it probably differs from school-to-school.  However, at the minimum, I believe leadership students may learn extracurricular material, work on life skills, learn teaching skills.  In essence, they have access to and are responsible for more material.



naomisarah said:


> Ah! Thanks for that. Do you know what's differently required for a leadership student versus a non-leadership student?
> 
> See in our school, the blue/white/red means "junior instructor trainee" and the solid red means "senior instructor trainee" while a solid black is "certified instructor"...


----------



## Balrog

Don't get me started.  I'm in the ATA and I disagree with this like you wouldn't believe.  And the solution to the problem is so damn simple, yet no one wants to do it:  Don't give rank to Tiny Tigers.  Period, end of statement.


----------



## Balrog

stevebjj said:


> I don't see anything wrong with it.  I mean, from what I've heard, the adult ATA black belts can't defend themselves, either.  So, at least the grading is consistent.


You heard wrong.  Sorry to disillusion you.


----------



## Steve

Balrog said:


> You heard wrong.  Sorry to disillusion you.


  Just poking fun, Balrog.  I know next to nothing about TKD.


----------



## hungryninja

One alternative I've seen from an ATA school is where they give out tiny tiger ranks/belts (essentially, white belts with colored stripes designating "rank" or progression through the TT ranks). They remain as "white" belts (or colored white belts) until they are older (juniors), where they start going through normal belts, but starting at orange belt.But I agree with you Balrog.





Balrog said:


> Don't get me started.  I'm in the ATA and I disagree with this like you wouldn't believe.  And the solution to the problem is so damn simple, yet no one wants to do it:  Don't give rank to Tiny Tigers.  Period, end of statement.


----------



## miguksaram

stevebjj said:


> Just poking fun, Balrog.  I know next to nothing about TKD.


And that still makes you more knowledgeable about TKD than ATA. ha.ha.ha..
(_Writer's note: I am only poking fun and ribbing ATA.  ATA like any other martial art has good and bad practitioners, but all we really hear about our the bad...such as this particular subject.  I ask that the ATA please not send there XMA ninjas with their foam padded kamas to take me out as I am allergic to the material they use on them. Thank you)_


----------



## miguksaram

hungryninja said:


> One alternative I've seen from an ATA school is where they give out tiny tiger ranks/belts (essentially, white belts with colored stripes designating "rank" or progression through the TT ranks). They remain as "white" belts (or colored white belts) until they are older (juniors), where they start going through normal belts, but starting at orange belt.But I agree with you Balrog.


Life Time Fitness is starting their own martial arts program and one of the classes will be 4-5 year olds.  I am heading up the program at our local LTF club in Warrenville, IL.  I plan on using this type of system for them.  They will will have White belts with the color stripe going down the middle.  I am constructing the program so that when they reach a certain rank in their program it will be equivalent to a beginning rank in the 6-7 kids program.  (Example a w/yellow stripe will be equal to a orange w/white stripe).  This way they can transition to the next class with out have to feel that they started over.


----------



## Carol

hungryninja said:


> In the ATA, it probably differs from school-to-school.  However, at the minimum, I believe leadership students may learn extracurricular material, work on life skills, learn teaching skills.  In essence, they have access to and are responsible for more material.



And are charged more, correct?  My understanding is that enrollment in these types of "leadership programs" requires additional tuition that is paid over and above the regular class tuition.


----------



## dancingalone

Carol said:


> And are charged more, correct?  My understanding is that enrollment in these types of "leadership programs" requires additional tuition that is paid over and above the regular class tuition.



Yep.  It's another 30 bucks on top of the basic tuition at my niece's school, but they definitely push you to take a higher tier class since you can't really learn everything needed to advance if you pay only for 'basic' classes.  Hmm, maybe meat for another topic.


----------



## Steve

dancingalone said:


> Yep.  It's another 30 bucks on top of the basic tuition at my niece's school, but they definitely push you to take a higher tier class since you can't really learn everything needed to advance if you pay only for 'basic' classes.  Hmm, maybe meat for another topic.


FWIW, not as a comment on the instruction, but on the marketing scheme, this sort of thing pisses me off as a parent.  This add-on BS would be enough alone to make sure you never got my business.


----------



## dancingalone

stevebjj said:


> FWIW, not as a comment on the instruction, but on the marketing scheme, this sort of thing pisses me off as a parent.  This add-on BS would be enough alone to make sure you never got my business.



I'll start a new thread.


----------



## NSRTKD

miguksaram said:


> and that still makes you more knowledgeable about tkd than ata. Ha.ha.ha..(_writer's note: I am only poking fun and ribbing ata.  Ata like any other martial art has good and bad practitioners, but all we really hear about our the bad...such as this particular subject.  I ask that the ata please not send there xma ninjas with their foam padded kamas to take me out as i am allergic to the material they use on them. Thank you)_


bahahaha.....


----------



## miguksaram

stevebjj said:


> FWIW, not as a comment on the instruction, but on the marketing scheme, this sort of thing pisses me off as a parent.  This add-on BS would be enough alone to make sure you never got my business.


But we see it in everything else.  Buy a car.  They will charge you extra for add ons...purchase most services and you will pay for an add-on service.  Gyms are no different.  You can get the basic equipment but if you want to do some of the aerobics classes you will have to pay extra.  I don't have a problem with it.  I do agree, that I would not give him my business, but that is only because I know that I can get more for less at other places.


----------



## Steve

miguksaram said:


> But we see it in everything else.  Buy a car.  They will charge you extra for add ons...purchase most services and you will pay for an add-on service.  Gyms are no different.  You can get the basic equipment but if you want to do some of the aerobics classes you will have to pay extra.  I don't have a problem with it.  I do agree, that I would not give him my business, but that is only because I know that I can get more for less at other places.


Which is why buying a car is something that is almost universally reviled.  Would you want to associate with a business on a regular basis that uses the same tactics as a car lot?  That's exactly my point.


----------



## miguksaram

stevebjj said:


> Which is why buying a car is something that is almost universally reviled.  Would you want to associate with a business on a regular basis that uses the same tactics as a car lot?  That's exactly my point.


Actually it was always the use car sales that have the stigma.  Which (like ATA) is only a small area of the industry.  What about gyms?  What about cell phones?  Pretty much everything has some sort of add-on.  Just business as it is.


----------



## vikings827

naomisarah said:


> Does anyone actually know the requirements of making black belt for this particular 5 year old?
> 
> My 5 year old is about as graceful as a drunken giraffe, so I can't imagine her making a black belt before her teens, and that's not our "style" in our school anyways. My 5 year old has a striped yellow belt, and I have refused to let her test because in terms of technique, she's only at the level of a striped yellow belt, and barely, regardless of the fact that she remembers all the material. In our school, even a 5 year old has to retain all the previous forms and techniques taught and complete 13 one-steps plus know the meanings of all the forms and belts passed thus far. My daughter can do that, but because her kicks AT her belt level and below still look very beginner (I'm NOT saying this to be unsupportive and mean, and of course don't say things to her rudely, just being honest about the coordination of a 5 year old body) she hasn't earned a green belt, so I haven't let her test. I plan to let her test soon, since she is working hard and, now that she has mastered the forms, is very focused on technique (for a 5 year old), but if she earns her green belt (around the time she turns 6), she will stay there for quite a while, I imagine - possibly a year until I let her go for stripes, if she seems ready. She might surprise me, but it's my duty to hold her back when she wants to move faster than she is ready for, or when any instructor wants her to rank higher than she deserves.
> 
> What I'm getting at with this is that each child advances based on his/her ability, but I think it's also partly the parents' responsibility to teach their children NOT to get hung up on ranking at each testing, and encouraging the child to focus on correct technique before allowing the kid to test. As much as our instructors are in charge, ultimately, I'm the one who pays for testing, so if I pay for her to test clearly before she is ready, I'm partly at fault too, when she wears the next belt and faces endless frustration because she wasn't ready.
> 
> For my 5 year old, reverse side kicks are a huuuuge challenge. So would it be fair for me to let her test just because she can throw one successfully in front of the judges, or should I make her wait until she is confident in every (or most, at least) reverse side kick she throws, and no longer gets frustrated with herself over them?
> 
> My daughter is also a great singer, but should I put her in a broadway show or let her sing for the family at holidays? One will teach her that people love her performances and that she is awesome at it, and the other teaches her the very same thing without giving her nowhere "up from here" to go. I believe in equipping my children to make their own success when they are old enough to appreciate it, rather than giving them the illusion of success based on what I have paid for.
> 
> So while I guess, having not seen the requirements of the school and not seeing this particular "black belt" in action, I can't really say he doesn't deserve it for sure (although it's hard to say otherwise, really), I think it's important to remember that while the school is allowing this progression, the parents are obviously encouraging it too, and partly at fault. The public needs better education about what having a black belt means, and the parents need to think about not letting their children advance until they can comprehend the amount of work put into a black belt. This kid may (I have no crystal ball, it's just a guess) grow up and expect that he can earn everything faster and younger than everybody else, and be both disappointed in the world and disgruntled with his parents for providing him with false expectations.



This is quite similar to the grade inflation of our school aged kids.  Parents cause both of these premature successes. The good side of this is it builds self confidence.  The downside??? Helicoptering parents.


----------



## vikings827

You are near a great kukkiwon  TKD dojo.  It is ABBC, in Lombard IL>  My brother goes there, and I visited once.  The owner and chief instructor is the BEST.


----------



## msmitht

this is supposed to be about a 5 year old who is a black belt! Not marketing or hating the ata because their techniques lack real power and is not up to par with any other tkd orgs standards. There are pros and cons...blah blah blah. Anyone who thinks a 5 year old should wear a black belt is full of crap. You will never convince me or any real martial artist otherwise. I laugh at those who disagree and have pity for your students


----------



## Cyriacus

This is what Junior Black Belts are for.

Give them the JBB to signify their Basic Knowledge of Techniques.
And hopefully by the time theyre 18, theyll be able to properly Apply those Techniques.


----------



## Master Dan

Franklly I wish they would go back to 18 years old minimum but no matter what the excuse is its still all about the money and all the Pooms that convert after 15 so they are 3rd 4th dan rediculous Martial is half the meaning in Martial art which means military focused on some level would we call a Marine a Marine at 5 years old or 15? in most cases not! I commend the child and parents for training and healthy life style but the point in the Art that effort is its own reward has been totally lost and not traded for imaginary Gravatoss and pandering but this is what happens when you take a traditional native artform that was never meant to be for profit and change it to suite a Capitolist theme. The Asians are slowly dealing with the effects of this in the home land due to introducing the same value system to keep thier own kids interested and training. There is a need and place for youth and famly trianing but it should not be put on the same level as adult Martial training.


----------



## miguksaram

vikings827 said:


> You are near a great kukkiwon  TKD dojo.  It is ABBC, in Lombard IL>  My brother goes there, and I visited once.  The owner and chief instructor is the BEST.


Who is near?


----------



## j-squared

Mom's check cleared?


----------



## Twin Fist

one guy teaching cheese makes us all look cheesy by association

it isnt fair, but it is what it is.



ETinCYQX said:


> As much as this used to bug me, I find myself more and more indifferent. I know what my black belt means, I know what the belts I give out mean, I'm happy.


----------



## ETinCYQX

Twin Fist said:


> one guy teaching cheese makes us all look cheesy by association
> 
> it isnt fair, but it is what it is.



Yeah but what can I do about it? Answer's simple. Get back on the mat and teach quality, high standard Taekwondo.


----------



## Twin Fist

i would have no problem having a sit down conversation with the instructor in charge of the 2 yr old bb and ask him exactly what the **** he was thinking?


----------



## puunui

Master Dan said:


> Franklly I wish they would go back to 18 years old minimum but no matter what the excuse is its still all about the money and all the Pooms that convert after 15 so they are 3rd 4th dan rediculous




There was never any 18 year old minimum age requirement. USTU Past President LEE Moo Yong was nine years old when he was promoted to Moo Duk Kwan 1st Dan by GM HWANG Kee in 1952. He seems to have turned out ok.


----------



## Gemini

At first glance, such articles make for easy targets. I thought this entire post provides a pov of a bigger picture. I just had to add a little.


Thesemindz said:


> On the one hand, I'm glad this kid's parents have him doing karate instead of eating doughnuts.


 Unfortunately, all to rare. The effort alone makes me applaud the effort.



Thesemindz said:


> On the other hand, I bet I could kick his little black belt *** in a fight. So you have to put it all in perspective.


 Fair enough, but I've never subscribed to this way of thinking. If you can beat me, do I surrender my belt? This has never been, not ever should be, a benchmark for receiving a Black belt. We can't all be Bruce Lee, but we can be a better "us". Forget the article, I'd like to see what the kid can do. I know so many teen and adult black belts with poor technique it makes me cringe. Why do we put so much emphasis on age alone? Quality of technique is not defined by age.



Thesemindz said:


> Maybe this is just the beginning of a lifetime of study and practice and dedication to martial arts.


 This in my mind is the bottom. If you spend a lifetime studying, a black belt is only one of many stepping stones over a very long road. Why get so hung up about it. I say keep going kid and don't let anyone dissuade you. Maybe this whole thing is so much hype. We do have our share of BS. I really can't tell from just an article.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

So here we are again arguing about the color of the cloth around a child's waist and whether or not the little tyke deserves Reversi ranking.

Given that the belt is for competition bracketing and the little tyke will only be matched up against other little tykes in his age group who have the same amount of time in as he does, and only within the ATA, I see no problem with it.

It used to bother me a lot, and if you dig through here, you can find some of my posts on the subject.  

Then I stopped taking myself so seriously and got off of my high horse.  It's a kids program.  The kid is doing something constructive and isn't in front of the television.  Mom and dad are involved and the instructor seems to genuinely care about her students.  Seems like a healthy activity to me.


----------



## Twin Fist

and at that moment, the future of TKD being a laughing stock was set in stone............................





puunui said:


> There was never any 18 year old minimum age requirement. USTU Past President LEE Moo Yong was nine years old when he was promoted to Moo Duk Kwan 1st Dan by GM HWANG Kee in 1952. He seems to have turned out ok.


----------



## miguksaram

Twin Fist said:


> and at that moment, the future of TKD being a laughing stock was set in stone............................


Maybe your TKD was, but mine and others that I know, are doing just fine holding our own.


----------



## Cyriacus

miguksaram said:


> Maybe your TKD was, but mine and others that I know, are doing just fine holding our own.


The issue is that bad Dojos/Dojangs/Gyms/Any-MA get bad Reputations. Good Dojos etc dont, because they dont seek publicity as much. As such, bad TKD is more commonly known than Good TKD, because its whats on display.


----------



## Twin Fist

you might think you are, but you are not. Let me tell you a little story. in 2009, i went to a seminar/gathering for Kajukembo and kenpo stylists. We worked out all day on different combinations, techniques, ideas, etc. typical seminar stuff really. No less than 4 different times, people who had worked out with me, treated me like an equal, totally changed thier attitude when they found out i was a TKD dan. Two actually LAUGHED, one said he felt sorry for me, and one actually turned around and walked away.

Were they jerks? maybe

did it convince me that the reputation of TKD is in the toilet? 

absolutely.

too many pre-teen blackbelts
too many mcdojo's
the entire joke that is olympic flippy kicky kickboxing
TKD is considered the retarded stepbrother of the martial arts by many other martial artists

I dont like it either, but i will not bury my head in the sand and pretend it isnt true.

I am sure YOU think it is all peaches and creme, and it could be said that as long as a person is happy, who cares what others think

it could also be said that we lie to ourselves, but others may tell us the truth if we are willing to listen




miguksaram said:


> Maybe your TKD was, but mine and others that I know, are doing just fine holding our own.


----------



## miguksaram

Twin Fist said:


> you might think you are, but you are not. Let me tell you a little story. in 2009, i went to a seminar/gathering for Kajukembo and kenpo stylists. We worked out all day on different combinations, techniques, ideas, etc. typical seminar stuff really. No less than 4 different times, people who had worked out with me, treated me like an equal, totally changed thier attitude when they found out i was a TKD dan. Two actually LAUGHED, one said he felt sorry for me, and one actually turned around and walked away.
> 
> Were they jerks? maybe
> 
> did it convince me that the reputation of TKD is in the toilet?
> 
> absolutely.


The must have really hurt your feelings when they told you that your TKD was a joke, to make you so bitter.

I have been to gatherings with Kempo and Kajukembo as well.  I went there in my dobok as a TKD practitioner.  I got on the mat and mixed it up with them.  The result, we had a great time and no one felt sorry for me because of my TKD background.  In fact they wanted to learn some more footwork drills from me in exchange for some hand drills from them.  So I guess the guys you hung were just closed minded jerks.



> too many pre-teen blackbelts
> too many mcdojo's
> the entire joke that is olympic flippy kicky kickboxing


Curious...have you ever gotten in the ring with one of the "flippy kicky" Olympic fighters? I see a lot of people put it down, yet see very little step up and attempt to do it.  Hell, can you even last a in a typical Olympic "flippy kicky" workout?


> TKD is considered the retarded stepbrother of the martial arts by many other martial artists
> 
> I dont like it either, but i will not bury my head in the sand and pretend it isnt true.


So then you admit that you learned retarded martial arts.  I'm sure your TKD instructor would be pleased with your feelings towards what she taught you.



> I am sure YOU think it is all peaches and creme, and it could be said that as long as a person is happy, who cares what others think


No I do not think it is all peaches and cream. There are schools that are out there that make all martial arts look bad...TKD, Kempo, Karate, etc.  Trouble is that what I learned did not come from those schools.  The TKD that I learned and practice had nothing to do with them so why should I stress when some lug nut makes a comment about how he feels sorry for me because I learned TKD.  I actually feel bad for that lug nut because he never had a chance to see what good TKD is. 



> it could also be said that we lie to ourselves, but others may tell us the truth if we are willing to listen


You are correct.  I see that all the time on this board.


----------



## msmitht

Twin Fist said:


> you might think you are, but you are not. Let me tell you a little story. in 2009, i went to a seminar/gathering for Kajukembo and kenpo stylists. We worked out all day on different combinations, techniques, ideas, etc. typical seminar stuff really. No less than 4 different times, people who had worked out with me, treated me like an equal, totally changed thier attitude when they found out i was a TKD dan. Two actually LAUGHED, one said he felt sorry for me, and one actually turned around and walked away.
> 
> Were they jerks? maybe
> 
> did it convince me that the reputation of TKD is in the toilet?
> 
> absolutely.
> 
> too many pre-teen blackbelts
> too many mcdojo's
> the entire joke that is olympic flippy kicky kickboxing
> TKD is considered the retarded stepbrother of the martial arts by many other martial artists
> 
> I dont like it either, but i will not bury my head in the sand and pretend it isnt true.
> 
> I am sure YOU think it is all peaches and creme, and it could be said that as long as a person is happy, who cares what others think
> 
> it could also be said that we lie to ourselves, but others may tell us the truth if we are willing to listen


Sad....just sad. I believe that in some cases you are correct. The lack of standards in many tkd schools, both kkw and the others, has led to many bad poom/dan belts (yourself included tf). Like anything else you can not judge every school by what you see at the bad ones.
I had some kajukenbo students at a seminar I held last year. We worked on power kicking and trapfighting drills followed by olympic style sparring. They loved the freedom to hit as hard as they could. They could not kick very well but learned how to better judge distance at long range. Maybe the kjkb students you met have only been exposed to weak, pathetic tkd. You were an example of either good or bad tkd. I'm guessing that, from their laughter, it was not the good.


----------



## Twin Fist

dude, seriously, stop making things personal. Nothing i wrote was directed at you but you take EVERYTHING personal and then you GET personal and YOU cause the mods to get involved. Your entire post is one long personal attack. And it has been reported as it violates the TOS of this board.

untill you can have a conversation and not act all butthurt, i may have to put you on the iggy list. I wont get myself in trouble over your inability to seperate your "art" from your own sense of self worth.

untill you can have a mature, rational discussion of martial arts, i bid you good day.




miguksaram said:


> The must have really hurt your feelings when they told you that your TKD was a joke, to make you so bitter.
> 
> I have been to gatherings with Kempo and Kajukembo as well.  I went there in my dobok as a TKD practitioner.  I got on the mat and mixed it up with them.  The result, we had a great time and no one felt sorry for me because of my TKD background.  In fact they wanted to learn some more footwork drills from me in exchange for some hand drills from them.  So I guess the guys you hung were just closed minded jerks.
> 
> 
> Curious...have you ever gotten in the ring with one of the "flippy kicky" Olympic fighters? I see a lot of people put it down, yet see very little step up and attempt to do it.  Hell, can you even last a in a typical Olympic "flippy kicky" workout?
> 
> So then you admit that you learned retarded martial arts.  I'm sure your TKD instructor would be pleased with your feelings towards what she taught you.
> 
> 
> No I do not think it is all peaches and cream. There are schools that are out there that make all martial arts look bad...TKD, Kempo, Karate, etc.  Trouble is that what I learned did not come from those schools.  The TKD that I learned and practice had nothing to do with them so why should I stress when some lug nut makes a comment about how he feels sorry for me because I learned TKD.  I actually feel bad for that lug nut because he never had a chance to see what good TKD is.
> 
> 
> You are correct.  I see that all the time on this board.


----------



## Twin Fist

and AGAIN with the personal attacks. You guys take everything so personal. I havent insulted YOU, but you feel free to insult ME personally. Thats petty.

you say I am a bad bb. Based on what?

And i guessed you missed what i actually wrote, those guys were fine with ME and my bag of tricks, they laughed at TKD, not me. And based on what I see here, I dont blame them





msmitht said:


> Sad....just sad. I believe that in some cases you are correct. The lack of standards in many tkd schools, both kkw and the others, has led to many bad poom/dan belts (yourself included tf). Like anything else you can not judge every school by what you see at the bad ones.
> I had some kajukenbo students at a seminar I held last year. We worked on power kicking and trapfighting drills followed by olympic style sparring. They loved the freedom to hit as hard as they could. They could not kick very well but learned how to better judge distance at long range. Maybe the kjkb students you met have only been exposed to weak, pathetic tkd. You were an example of either good or bad tkd. I'm guessing that, from their laughter, it was not the good.


----------



## Grenadier

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:*

Please keep this conversation polite and civil.  If you do not like what someone else is saying, then use the Ignore feature.  

-Ronald Shin
-MT Assistant Administrator


----------



## VictorV

As several people have pointed out, there are good and bad TKD schools. I don't hold the ATA in high regard due to personal experience. First, I've fought ATA TKD black belts and found their training to be...less than lacking (to give you an idea of my martial arts training: my brother and I would buy whatever we could find in used bookstores, combine it with what we say on late night movies, and wrasslin'). Could they kick? Yes? Could they fight? No. Second, I've found that the schools are more concerned with profit over quality. I used to point, laugh, and call anyone who practiced TKD a wannabe martial artist. Now with that said, when I was in the navy I worked with a guy who was into martial arts and after working out with him a couple times found out he had a black belt in TKD. Which really surprised me. He actually knew how to fight. The few times we sparred he showed that he had a good ground game and that he could do more than just throw a kick. After my last deployment, I had a new respect for TKD. As he explained to me, his school used equivallency belts for their childrens program. A child's BB was equal to a green belt.

I agree with several others, at least the kid isn't sitting at home in front of the tv playing video games. The child is learning something useful and the parents are involved. Which is a lot more than I can say about most parents.


----------



## miguksaram

Twin Fist said:


> dude, seriously, stop making things personal. Nothing i wrote was directed at you but you take EVERYTHING personal and then you GET personal and YOU cause the mods to get involved. Your entire post is one long personal attack. And it has been reported as it violates the TOS of this board.  untill you can have a conversation and not act all butthurt, i may have  to put you on the iggy list. I wont get myself in trouble over your  inability to seperate your "art" from your own sense of self worth.


You insult an art by calling it retarded.  You insult an ethnic group by calling the thieves and liars and now you feel you have been violated because I make an observation based on your behavior and go whining to the mods and I'm the one who is buttsore?  BTW...the only time I have bitched about you was when you made the racist remark (yes, I still think it was racist) about Koreans being thieves and liars.  

You don't like Taekwondo..we get it.  You don't like Korean martial artists...check.  So why even post on this particular board when you have nothing but discontent about an art you studied?  I do separate myself from my art because I don't get upset about things that happen in the past or in another school.  It seems you have this problem as you are up in arms about a retarded art made by thieves and liars that you had no problem studying and accepting a black belt in.  You want to ignore me that is fine...You will have to excuse me if I'm still able to sit just fine because my butt is not sore from your rejection...BTW...funny how it was me that was defending you before against another TKD person who was insulting your school and kids in the past...but yeah...I'm the buttsore guy.






> untill you can have a mature, rational discussion of martial arts, i bid you good day.


You mean until I come around to thinking just like you, you will bid me good day....well hasta pasta, don't let the door hit you on the *** on the way out.


----------



## Twin Fist

personal: you attacking ME

not personal: me giving an opinion of SOME parts of an art

learn the difference.

And you have no idea what you are talking about. I LOVE TKD, the old fashioned blood and guts TKD that came to the US in the 50's and 60's taught by TOUGH men and women before they made a sport out of it.

The TKD i learned, with no giant maxi pads strapped to your chest, with PUNCHES to the FACE as well as kicks

my TKD line produced troy dorsey, ray mccallum, and demetrius havanas (you prob dont know those names, none of them wore chest protectors....)

what i dont like is the joke TKD is being made into by the 5 yr old BB's, the mcdojo's, the hands down no self defense schools, the instructors that ALLOW "i only got my bb so i could compete"

i LOVE tkd, i hate what some people are doing to it. you OUGHT to be able to tell the difference

BTW- i have never said i dont like korean martial artists. I said i dont like liars and thieves. And the modern history of korean martial arts is LOADED with lies and theft.

if that offends you, sorry, but it also happens to be true.


----------



## VictorV

Twin Fist said:


> I said i dont like liars and thieves. And the modern history of korean martial arts is LOADED with lies and theft.
> 
> if that offends you, sorry, but it also happens to be true.



Dude, you really need to get over it. ALL matial arts are loaded with lies and theft. It's the nature of the beast. Deal with it.


----------



## Twin Fist

thats prob true, but i am not a BB in every style, i am a BB and teacher of THIS still, so i want to make THIS style better.


----------



## Gemini

Twin Fist said:


> thats prob true, but i am not a BB in every style, i am a BB and teacher of THIS still, so i want to make THIS style better.


Given the Korean martial culture and documented history was wiped out during the Japanese occupation, what options were available to revive their culture?


----------



## msmitht

Twin Fist said:


> thats prob true, but i am not a BB in every style, i am a BB and teacher of THIS still, so i want to make THIS style better.


Then man up and defend your art instead of tearing it down! We all know that there are bad schools but when you slam real tkd I take it personal. Either stop knocking it or go talk smack somewhere else. They like smak talking on bullshido...
And btw, people lie about all sorts of things. It is not unique to tkd. Some tell the truth, I ignore and feel pity for the others.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Gemini said:


> Given the Korean martial culture and documented history was wiped out during the Japanese occupation, what options were available to revive their culture?


Given that the martial arts had not been a huge part of Korean culture for probably a couple of centuries, probably more, prior to the occupation, I think that you're asking the wrong question.

I think that the question is this: The Japanese made judo and kendo a part of Korean culture during the occupation, and Koreans living in Japan and returning to Korea with the things that they had learned in Japan was also a part of Korean culture.  Why should they not incorporate those things into post-occupation Korean culture?


----------



## VictorV

From what I've read, when Korea had it's "revolt" in 1919, Japan forcefully banned all things Korean and made all things Japanese mandatory. I had to write a paper on Hap Ki Do so seeing it in a historical light made me a bit more appreciative of what the Korean government did after WWII.


----------



## miguksaram

Twin Fist said:


> personal: you attacking ME


You calling an ethnic group thieves and liars...personal.  



> not personal: me giving an opinion of SOME parts of an art





			
				TF said:
			
		

> TKD is considered the retarded stepbrother of the martial arts by many other martial artists
> 
> *I dont like it either, but i will not bury my head in the sand and pretend it isnt true.*


Seems like this is more of a all or nothing statement than parts of it.


> learn the difference.


Before you point your finger at me...be sure your hand is clean. 



> And you have no idea what you are talking about. I LOVE TKD, the old fashioned blood and guts TKD that came to the US in the 50's and 60's taught by TOUGH men and women before they made a sport out of it.


There was a sport well before it came to the U.S.  And those people who brought it here are the ones you are calling thieves and liars today.



> The TKD i learned, with no giant maxi pads strapped to your chest, with PUNCHES to the FACE as well as kicks
> 
> my TKD line produced troy dorsey, ray mccallum, and demetrius havanas (you prob dont know those names, none of them wore chest protectors....)


Actually I do know of Mst. Dorsey and Mst. McCallum.  I grew up watching those guys fight on the open circuit when I would go compete back in the '80's.  Being from Chicago, all the great fighters came in and out especially at the AKA Grands.  Also got to see them in the Pro-am as well.



> what i dont like is the joke TKD is being made into by the 5 yr old BB's, the mcdojo's, the hands down no self defense schools, the instructors that ALLOW "i only got my bb so i could compete"


I am not fond of them either.  So what I do is not patronize them, and if asked my opinion, I tell people not to go to those schools.  What I don't do is jump up and down and rant on how retarded TKD is because of handful of schools.  Just like I don't yell how retarded Kempo is because of certain Kenpo schools practice the same watered down, belt milling practice.  



> i LOVE tkd, i hate what some people are doing to it. you OUGHT to be able to tell the difference


Not when you call it retarded and the pioneers thieves and liars...it is hard to see the love.



> BTW- i have never said i dont like korean martial artists. I said i dont like liars and thieves. And the modern history of korean martial arts is LOADED with lies and theft.





			
				TF said:
			
		

> lets face it.  When it comes to martial arts Korean are thieves and liars


That doesn't quite ring of you just not liking thieves and liars.  I don't like thieves and liars either, yet I don't specific ethnic group thieves and liars, just because a couple of them may have not owned up to the truth.



> if that offends you, sorry, but it also happens to be true.


The only part that ever really offended me was your ethnic remark towards my friends, colleagues, seniors, and mentors.  The rest I can care less about because it is basically the same diatribe that I have heard a thousand times before from you and other people of same mind set.


----------



## miguksaram

Gemini said:


> Given the Korean martial culture and documented history was wiped out during the Japanese occupation, what options were available to revive their culture?


Actually not entirely true.  Given that they have found books such as the Mooyedobotongji shows that martial culture was not wiped out.  Little by little they are finding other historical documents all over the world that pre-dates Japanese occupation.  The problem is that when most of us think of martial arts we tend to think stylistic systems.  Korea did have a martial art culture which was military based.  They had very little H2H and more weapon work.


----------



## Twin Fist

let me guess, the only thing you consider "real" is KKW certified WTF style ......... /eyeroll

if you take it personal, thats YOUR problem, not mine.

wait, i just realized you played the "go along with us and our opinions or leave card" when you said this:

" Either stop knocking it or go talk smack somewhere else."

uh....NO








msmitht said:


> Then man up and defend your art instead of tearing it down! We all know that there are bad schools but when you slam real tkd I take it personal. Either stop knocking it or go talk smack somewhere else. They like smak talking on bullshido...
> And btw, people lie about all sorts of things. It is not unique to tkd. Some tell the truth, I ignore and feel pity for the others.


----------



## miguksaram

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Given that the martial arts had not been a huge part of Korean culture for probably a couple of centuries, probably more, prior to the occupation, I think that you're asking the wrong question.


Again, they had the martial arts, but it was military based not style or systematic based like Karate we see.  Depending on which dynasty we are talking about, most people were born into their roles. So if you were born into a military family, chances are you would be learning martial arts and becoming a soldier/officer.  If you were born into a scholastic family chances are you would be a teacher or government official.  So martial arts were always there.  It was through strategic martial arts that Korea was able to fend off many invaders such as the Hun, Chinese and even earlier Japanese invasions.  They even, at one point, stopped US Admiral Perry from docking.  It was then that Perry went over to Japan and forced his way there.


----------



## VictorV

Twin Fist said:


> let me guess, the only thing you consider "real" is KKW certified WTF style ......... /eyeroll
> 
> if you take it personal, thats YOUR problem, not mine.



Thing is, reading your posts, you come across as hating the entire korean culture and that you actively LOATHE TKD. I'm not a fan of TKD, but even to me, you seem to go overboard. It's one thing to be critical of an art for making unfounded claims, and another to call an entire people thieves and liars. By extension of your logic, the U.S. is nothing but thieves and liars.


----------



## Grenadier

Ladies and Gentlemen,

If you have a personal squabble with another member, this forum is not the place to air things out.  Take it elsewhere, or better yet, you can use the "ignore this poster" feature that is part of the vBulletin software that powers this forum.  

If you can't abide by the rules, then infractions will be handed out.  

-Ronald Shin
-MT Assistant Administrator


----------



## Twin Fist

they should have given credit to the source and not have published a fake history



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Given that the martial arts had not been a huge part of Korean culture for probably a couple of centuries, probably more, prior to the occupation, I think that you're asking the wrong question.
> 
> I think that the question is this: The Japanese made judo and kendo a part of Korean culture during the occupation, and Koreans living in Japan and returning to Korea with the things that they had learned in Japan was also a part of Korean culture.  Why should they not incorporate those things into post-occupation Korean culture?


----------



## Twin Fist

then pay attention to what i actually said, not your impressions

i said, IN ENGLISH that i loved TKD i just didnt like what some people were doing to it, and i hate the people that lie about it's origins

i dont care what you THINK do not blame me for your *guess* as to what i think when you ignore what i actually say.....



VictorV said:


> Thing is, reading your posts, you come across as hating the entire korean culture and that you actively LOATHE TKD. I'm not a fan of TKD, but even to me, you seem to go overboard. It's one thing to be critical of an art for making unfounded claims, and another to call an entire people thieves and liars. By extension of your logic, the U.S. is nothing but thieves and liars.


----------



## Twin Fist

this isnt about me

back on subject

why doesnt the ATA ban this sort of thing, or at least set a minimum age for bb?

A) money
B) money
c) money

you get one guess


----------



## VictorV

Twin Fist said:


> then pay attention to what i actually said, not your impressions
> 
> i said, IN ENGLISH that i loved TKD i just didnt like what some people were doing to it, and i hate the people that lie about it's origins
> 
> i dont care what you THINK do not blame me for your *guess* as to what i think when you ignore what i actually say.....



I've read what you said. A lot of what you've said. The ONLY thing you've been consistent in, is your hate of anything Korean. Again, there's a BIG difference between saying that you don't like the way things are done and saying that an entire culture is nothing but thieves and liars. My guess is *based* on _your_ posts and the way you come across in them. If you feel like we (and apparently there are a lot) take things out of context, mayhap you should really reconsider the way you post.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

miguksaram said:


> Again, they had the martial arts, but it was military based not style or systematic based like Karate we see. Depending on which dynasty we are talking about, most people were born into their roles. So if you were born into a military family, chances are you would be learning martial arts and becoming a soldier/officer. If you were born into a scholastic family chances are you would be a teacher or government official. So martial arts were always there. It was through strategic martial arts that Korea was able to fend off many invaders such as the Hun, Chinese and even earlier Japanese invasions. They even, at one point, stopped US Admiral Perry from docking. It was then that Perry went over to Japan and forced his way there.


Outside of the military is what I meant.


----------



## Gemini

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Given that the martial arts had not been a huge part of Korean culture for probably a couple of centuries, probably more, prior to the occupation, I think that you're asking the wrong question.
> 
> I think that the question is this: The Japanese made judo and kendo a part of Korean culture during the occupation, and Koreans living in Japan and returning to Korea with the things that they had learned in Japan was also a part of Korean culture.  Why should they not incorporate those things into post-occupation Korean culture?





miguksaram said:


> Actually not entirely true.  Given that they have found books such as the Mooyedobotongji shows that martial culture was not wiped out.  Little by little they are finding other historical documents all over the world that pre-dates Japanese occupation.  The problem is that when most of us think of martial arts we tend to think stylistic systems.  Korea did have a martial art culture which was military based.  They had very little H2H and more weapon work.





VictorV said:


> From what I've read, when Korea had it's "revolt" in 1919, Japan forcefully banned all things Korean and made all things Japanese mandatory. I had to write a paper on Hap Ki Do so seeing it in a historical light made me a bit more appreciative of what the Korean government did after WWII.



Thank you all for the responses. That's been a curiosity of mine for some time. Though I do enjoy history and place a value on it, it seems Korea's is more debatable than most, making it harder for me to follow. Admittedly, my main interest in martial arts is knowing that when I hit you, you're going to bleed. Profusely. Who invented the punch is a distant second.


----------



## miguksaram

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Outside of the military is what I meant.


True, very few families would practice martial arts.  Surprisingly it was mostly the upper class that practiced as it was required of them.  Again that training dealt mostly in weapon work more than H2H.  Kungsul/do (Archery) and Kumsul/do (Swordsmanship) were mostly practice by the upper class.


----------



## miguksaram

Gemini said:
			
		

> Thank you all for the responses. That's been a curiosity of mine for  some time. Though I do enjoy history and place a value on it, it seems  Korea's is more debatable than most, making it harder for me to follow.


What I have found is the more I read Korean general history, the more the debatable parts become less debatable.  



Gemini said:


> Admittedly, my main interest in martial arts is knowing that when I hit you, you're going to bleed. Profusely. Who invented the punch is a distant second.


 Love this! ha.ha.ha.ha..


----------



## miguksaram

Twin Fist said:


> this isnt about me
> 
> back on subject
> 
> why doesnt the ATA ban this sort of thing, or at least set a minimum age for bb?
> 
> A) money
> B) money
> c) money
> 
> you get one guess


I agree...money is a huge motivator.  Parents like to see little Johnny and Suzy get that black cloth around their waste to mark one more thing off their bucket list.  I would be surprised if they kept the 5 year old kid in the classes past another year or so.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

miguksaram said:


> I agree...money is a huge motivator.  Parents like to see little Johnny and Suzy get that black cloth around their waste to mark one more thing off their bucket list.  I would be surprised if they kept the 5 year old kid in the classes past another year or so.



And this is a very unfortunate thing to occur.  Perhaps it is a sign of our fast-food, microwave society.  Perhaps I'm just to old school.  But I much prefered it when it took 3 months to learn just the opening movements of one kata rather than learning one form per colored belt rank without really understanding what was being taught.  Rather than being a benefit to the child, it actually cheated him.


----------



## miguksaram

Kong Soo Do said:


> And this is a very unfortunate thing to occur.  Perhaps it is a sign of our fast-food, microwave society.  Perhaps I'm just to old school.  But I much prefered it when it took 3 months to learn just the opening movements of one kata rather than learning one form per colored belt rank without really understanding what was being taught.  Rather than being a benefit to the child, it actually cheated him.


I do believe it is greatly due to the instant gratification and never fail mindset that we have placed in our society.   Some Instructors, not just ATA, have since revamped the arts to meet this type of demand instead of getting the parents to understand that the martial arts are not like baseball or soccer.  

While I have no problem with schools making money, in fact I wish there were more successful schools out there, I cannot help but wonder if there is a way for them to be successful with out the constant belt milling.  So there has to be a way to maintain integrity and still make darn good money.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

miguksaram said:


> Not when you call it retarded and the pioneers thieves and liars...it is hard to see the love.


Actually, he didn't call it retarded.  He said that it is _perceived _as retarded by practitioners of other martial arts.  Which, while not a glowing endorsement, and frankly, incorrect, is not the same as calling the art itself retarded.  

I do find that there are people and schools that look down their noses at other arts.  Such people and places exist in greater or lesser concentrations depending upon where you are.  Perhaps his area is home to more such places?

I've encountered a few in my area.  I simply remove them from my 'go by to train with' list and move on.


----------



## Gemini

miguksaram said:


> I agree...money is a huge motivator.  Parents like to see little Johnny and Suzy get that black cloth around their waste to mark one more thing off their bucket list.  I would be surprised if they kept the 5 year old kid in the classes past another year or so.


True enough, but the reality is, we don't know. Prodigies are rare, but they're out there and to find them, we have to weed through the superficial. The same is true is every other sport or activity. I've always been more tolerant of the less skilled in search of the rare find. Give them all support and encouragement; the posers will weed themselves out sooner or later. How many times have we seen the kid who had no chance of amounting to anything, defy the odds and surpass everyone's expectations. I doubt there's a single instructor here who's never witnessed it at some point. All because someone didn't give up on them.

All my kids practice Taekwondo. My youngest who started in the dojang at 4, though wasn't a black belt at 5, did receive his black belt at a very young age. Forgetting the fact that his technique was more effective at 7 than many adults, I see in him a grand master at 70 with a lifetime of experience. It's become the very fabric he's made of. Who am I to say someone's child is anything less. Time will tell; not me. This is nothing more than a snapshot of a child's life. Let's not make too much of it.


----------



## miguksaram

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Actually, he didn't call it retarded.  He said that it is _perceived _as retarded by practitioners of other martial arts.  Which, while not a glowing endorsement, and frankly, incorrect, is not the same as calling the art itself retarded.


True, but he followed up with this statement: "*I dont like it either, but i will not bury my head in the sand and pretend it isnt true.*" which tells me he agrees with the statement.



> I do find that there are people and schools that look down their noses at other arts.  Such people and places exist in greater or lesser concentrations depending upon where you are.  Perhaps his area is home to more such places?
> 
> I've encountered a few in my area.  I simply remove them from my 'go by to train with' list and move on.


Exactly, I have encountered those people too.  More times than not they have only trained with a couple people from the art and based their opinion off of that.  So their opinion really doesn't bother me at all.


----------



## Gemini

miguksaram said:


> I cannot help but wonder if there is a way for them to be successful with out the constant belt milling.  So there has to be a way to maintain integrity and still make darn good money.


Probably one of the most sought after answers in martial arts. It's also the reason I refuse to open a public school that can only afford to stay open because I lowered my standards. I'm fortunate that I don't have to give someone a belt to keep them motivated or can't ask someone to leave because they lack the commitment I demand. we feed off each other. Watching those we respect and admire having to constantly wrestle with compromise is not a pleasant sight.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

miguksaram said:


> So there has to be a way to maintain integrity and still make darn good money.





			
				Gemini said:
			
		

> Probably one of the most sought after answers in martial arts. It's also the reason I refuse to open a public school that can only afford to stay open because I lowered my standards. I'm fortunate that I don't have to give someone a belt to keep them motivated or can't ask someone to leave because they lack the commitment I demand. we feed off each other. Watching those we respect and admire having to constantly wrestle with compromise is not a pleasant sight.



This is probaby going to get me in all kinds of trouble, but....perhaps....just perhaps the martial arts weren't really suppose to be a commercial venture?  Perhaps if money wasn't a primary motivating factor, then some/most/all of the 'stuff' that we complain about in the martial arts wouldn't exist?  

Just tossing it out there....


----------



## Twin Fist

DING winner


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

miguksaram said:


> True, but he followed up with this statement: "*I dont like it either, but i will not bury my head in the sand and pretend it isnt true.*" which tells me he agrees with the statement.


I don't know; I rather get the impression that he doesn't like the perception, not that he agrees with it.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Kong Soo Do said:


> This is probaby going to get me in all kinds of trouble, but....perhaps....just perhaps the martial arts weren't really suppose to be a commercial venture?  Perhaps if money wasn't a primary motivating factor, then some/most/all of the 'stuff' that we complain about in the martial arts wouldn't exist?
> 
> Just tossing it out there....


Good post. My pet hate with martial arts is hearing people using monetary/business excuses for lowering standards or "giving little johnny a black belt". If the only way you can make a dollar is to compromise your principles then sell up and get into another line of work. I also think its a complete myth that you cant build your school up by teaching martial arts properly, we fail kids at grading all the time and they dont quit, we dont hand out 3rd dans to primary school kids and we still have huge numbers of kids signing up. The number one reason people lower standards is laziness, its easier to teach lower standards and you dont have to explain to mrs smith why her little johnny failed his yellow belt grading. We had a new student come over to us recently, he was 8 years old and his father told me he had him in another club and his son was lazy, his form looked average and he looked sloppy in his movements compared to some of the other kids. He told me he felt good that his son would fail and it would teach him to train harder and that the reaching the next level would not come easily. Anyway, his son passed his grading and the father was furious, ripped him out of the school and looked for another school. Just goes to show the theory of passing kids just so they wont quit can also backfire.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

I do not use gradings as a means of monetary income for my studio; there is no fee for a grading.  My kendo studio is independent, so I will not ask a fee of my students.

I use the gradings to allow the student to do all of the curriculum for his/her grade under a microscope and then use it as an opportunity to give them more detailed feedback.  It also is good for them to have to perform under some pressure.

I call it a grading rather than a test because, really, I'm not testing them.  They don't 'grade' unless they are ready, at which point, it no longer can really be called a test.  

Also, it allows other students to see what is expected of senior students at higher grades.  

Since kendo doesn't use belts, there is no incentive to 'get a new belt.'  My students train more like the football team: I run them through a training regimen and repetitive drills and as they get better, they get to learn more advanced techniques.

Since everyone looks the same with regards to display of rank (none), the only way to see what 'rank' someone holds is to see how they perform.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I do not use gradings as a means of monetary income for my studio; there is no fee for a grading.  My kendo studio is independent, so I will not ask a fee of my students.
> 
> I use the gradings to allow the student to do all of the curriculum for his/her grade under a microscope and then use it as an opportunity to give them more detailed feedback.  It also is good for them to have to perform under some pressure.
> 
> I call it a grading rather than a test because, really, I'm not testing them.  They don't 'grade' unless they are ready, at which point, it no longer can really be called a test.
> 
> Also, it allows other students to see what is expected of senior students at higher grades.
> 
> Since kendo doesn't use belts, there is no incentive to 'get a new belt.'  My students train more like the football team: I run them through a training regimen and repetitive drills and as they get better, they get to learn more advanced techniques.
> 
> Since everyone looks the same with regards to display of rank (none), the only way to see what 'rank' someone holds is to see how they perform.


That sounds like a good way of doing things. My original instructor was similar, he would basically grade us in class, and the "official" grading was more so parents could get photos and for the whole 'ceremony' side of things. My new instructor likes to see us perform under pressure, and uses the grading as the actual 'test'. Both have their merrits.


----------



## SPX

Kong Soo Do said:


> Perhaps I'm just to old school.  But I much prefered it when it took 3 months to learn just the opening movements of one kata rather than learning one form per colored belt rank without really understanding what was being taught.



I give humans more credit than to think that anyone would need to learn at such a slow pace.  Why do you need three months to learn the opening movements of one kata?


----------



## miguksaram

Gemini said:


> Probably one of the most sought after answers in martial arts. It's also the reason I refuse to open a public school that can only afford to stay open because I lowered my standards. I'm fortunate that I don't have to give someone a belt to keep them motivated or can't ask someone to leave because they lack the commitment I demand. we feed off each other. Watching those we respect and admire having to constantly wrestle with compromise is not a pleasant sight.


Why does one have to lower the standards?  Harvard has not lowered their standards, just because some people cannot hack it once they got in.  At our school we have a set standard which students must adhere to in order to pass to the next belt.  If they do not meet the standard they do not test, it is that simple.  A average minimum time for even a Jr. BB is 5 years and they do have to be a minimum age as well.  That is not to say that being in somewhere longer means better.  We have had some kids do it in three years. My point is that we set forth the criteria and standards that each student has to meet.  As long as you are confident in what you do and you are providing excellent instruction at a fair price for not only the customer but for yourself as well then why lower standards?


----------



## miguksaram

Kong Soo Do said:


> This is probaby going to get me in all kinds of trouble, but....perhaps....just perhaps the martial arts weren't really suppose to be a commercial venture?  Perhaps if money wasn't a primary motivating factor, then some/most/all of the 'stuff' that we complain about in the martial arts wouldn't exist?


There will always be something for someone to ***** about.  
My question to you is why can it not be a commercial venture?  If I feel I am good at something, and feel I can pass this knowledge on to someone else, why not get paid for it?  I do not understand the stigma that martial artists shouldn't teach for money.  It has always been done.


----------



## miguksaram

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I don't know; I rather get the impression that he doesn't like the perception, not that he agrees with it.


Doesn't matter either way....let's just move on...new day...new things to discuss.


----------



## miguksaram

ralphmcpherson said:


> Good post. My pet hate with martial arts is hearing people using monetary/business excuses for lowering standards or "giving little johnny a black belt". If the only way you can make a dollar is to compromise your principles then sell up and get into another line of work.


Very well put.  


> I also think its a complete myth that you cant build your school up by teaching martial arts properly, we fail kids at grading all the time and they dont quit, we dont hand out 3rd dans to primary school kids and we still have huge numbers of kids signing up. The number one reason people lower standards is laziness, its easier to teach lower standards and you dont have to explain to mrs smith why her little johnny failed his yellow belt grading. We had a new student come over to us recently, he was 8 years old and his father told me he had him in another club and his son was lazy, his form looked average and he looked sloppy in his movements compared to some of the other kids. He told me he felt good that his son would fail and it would teach him to train harder and that the reaching the next level would not come easily. Anyway, his son passed his grading and the father was furious, ripped him out of the school and looked for another school. Just goes to show the theory of passing kids just so they wont quit can also backfire.


Exactly...we go through the same thing at our school.  I am happy to say that the standards that we set are enough to motivate  people from all over the US and Canada to come to our school once or  twice a year for our annual camps.  We are tough, but the parents appreciate what we do PLUS, believe it or not, the kids enjoy being at the school.  We have more dojo rats than I have ever seen (Note:  Those who don't know...dojo/dojang/kwoon rats are students that hang around the school and practice or just hang out even when they don't have classes that day...they are at the school almost 7 days a week).


----------



## Kong Soo Do

SPX said:


> I give humans more credit than to think that anyone would need to learn at such a slow pace.  Why do you need three months to learn the opening movements of one kata?



This is the way that Uechi Kanbun Sensei trained in China.  This is the way he taught.  His presentation of kata was so powerful, that historically, no one at demonstrations would follow him.  It taught not only the form, and more importantly the bukai but also patience.  

I have patterned our single form in MSK Kong Soo Do after this principle.  Just one movement sequence of the 25 in the form could easily last MULTIPLE classes.  We don't follow the philosophy of 'do a form, get a colored belt, repeat'.  Very little training takes place that way.  Our philosophy is quality rather than quantity.  Without offense intended towards anyone, nor is this a pat on our own back, we've had BB's from both Korean and non-Korean arts come to our school and admit/realize they wouldn't qualify for our yellow belt.  Think of it this way...and this is probably opening up a can of worms...and I'm speaking about non-sport TKD so keep it in perspective...if a person reaches the Dan levels in TKD but don't know how to grapple, lock, throw, choke, cavity press, misplace the bone and tendon, fight on the ground (real fighting not the sport version) then they did not get the full training they could have/should have.  They were rushed through without a full understanding of what TKD really consists of in relation to non-sport applications.  

Well, now I went and did it :uhyeah:


----------



## miguksaram

Kong Soo Do said:


> This is the way that Uechi Kanbun Sensei trained in China.  This is the way he taught.  His presentation of kata was so powerful, that historically, no one at demonstrations would follow him.  It taught not only the form, and more importantly the bukai but also patience.



This was pretty much a norm in most karate schools back in the day.  I had a couple of my seniors in my school tell me how lucky I was to learn half a form in a months time.  Stating they would be happy if that got to learn 3 more moves within that time frame.  I could be wrong but don't some kung fu schools teach in this way?  They show you only so much of  form per ranking?


----------



## Kong Soo Do

miguksaram said:


> There will always be something for someone to ***** about.
> My question to you is why can it not be a commercial venture?  If I feel I am good at something, and feel I can pass this knowledge on to someone else, why not get paid for it?  I do not understand the stigma that martial artists shouldn't teach for money.  It has always been done.



Actually, and with respect, it has not always been done this way.  Itosu Sensei as just one example was a full time college professor.  Martial arts was something that was a way of life rather than an occupational pursuit.  China is another example.  Teaching as a commercial venture did not really get into full swing until after WWII.  Not saying that one couldn't teach for money in a respectful, legitimate, non-watering the arts down way but it does allow for some much 'stuff' to creep in for those looking to make a fast buck.

Even when I operated a full 'commercial' school we operated on certain principles.  And the term 'commercial' is really wrong too be honest.  Perhaps 'club' would be better.  We charged just enough to keep the doors open which included me putting into the kitty even though I was the main instructor.  No one made a penny profit.  If someone wasn't serious, they were asked to leave (and yes, I've done so on several occasions).  We did not charge for belt testing.  But that's just how we rolled.


----------



## miguksaram

Kong Soo Do said:


> Actually, and with respect, it has not always been done this way.  Itosu Sensei as just one example was a full time college professor.  Martial arts was something that was a way of life rather than an occupational pursuit.  China is another example.  Teaching as a commercial venture did not really get into full swing until after WWII.


There may not have been such a demand for it up until then.  There were commercial schools and they did teach for money...there were not dozens and dozens, but they were there.  When society changed, especially after WWII, there was a higher demand for such ventures.  Supply and demand. 



> Not saying that one couldn't teach for money in a respectful, legitimate, non-watering the arts down way but it does allow for some much 'stuff' to creep in for those looking to make a fast buck.


Which is up to the individual instructor to decide.  So do we blame commercial schools for watering down the arts or do we blame the integrity of the instructors?  I know of a several very successful TKD schools that has not watered down their standards and still make good money.  



> Even when I operated a full 'commercial' school we operated on certain principles.  And the term 'commercial' is really wrong too be honest.  Perhaps 'club' would be better.  We charged just enough to keep the doors open which included me putting into the kitty even though I was the main instructor.  No one made a penny profit.  If someone wasn't serious, they were asked to leave (and yes, I've done so on several occasions).  We did not charge for belt testing.  But that's just how we rolled.


Which is fine...nothing wrong with the way you did.  I know of a lot of instructors who do it simply for the love of it and many blessings to all of you that do.  However, for those of us who wish to attempt to make a living at it, we are not exactly the devil of the martial arts world, yet many people scold those who do make a good living at it.  This is the part that I don't get.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Kong Soo Do said:


> Actually, and with respect, it has not always been done this way. Itosu Sensei as just one example was a full time college professor. Martial arts was something that was a way of life rather than an occupational pursuit. China is another example. Teaching as a commercial venture did not really get into full swing until after WWII. Not saying that one couldn't teach for money in a respectful, legitimate, non-watering the arts down way but it does allow for some much 'stuff' to creep in for those looking to make a fast buck.
> 
> Even when I operated a full 'commercial' school we operated on certain principles. And the term 'commercial' is really wrong too be honest. Perhaps 'club' would be better. We charged just enough to keep the doors open which included me putting into the kitty even though I was the main instructor. No one made a penny profit. If someone wasn't serious, they were asked to leave (and yes, I've done so on several occasions). We did not charge for belt testing. But that's just how we rolled.


Actually, he is correct; it has always been done.  Prior to the twentieth century, masters were sought after and paid for their services.  Takeda Sokaku did charge for his lessons, as did other masters.  It was their craft.

The dynamic was a bit different, but the idea that the teaching of martial arts for money somehow taints the art is a twentieth century invention, one that did not exist until people with disposable income and day jobs could afford to teach for free.... such as full time college professors.

The commercialism that we see in the arts today really began more in the eighties when the arts' market was expanded to include people who just wanted to 'get into shape' or get their kid away from the television.  This was done by MA school owners to take advantage of the fitness craze of the eighties.  The Karate Kid got more kids interested in the martial arts which expanded childrens programs even further.

Just to be clear, there have always been kids in the martial arts; but the current model of kids classes has its roots more in the eighties, well after the establishment of other commmercial schools.


----------



## dancingalone

Kong Soo Do said:


> if a person reaches the Dan levels in TKD but don't know how to grapple, lock, throw, choke, cavity press, misplace the bone and tendon, fight on the ground (real fighting not the sport version) then they did not get the full training they could have/should have.  They were rushed through without a full understanding of what TKD really consists of in relation to non-sport applications.



I share a lot of the same feelings, but to be fair can we truly say all those things were part of classic TKD?  Classic karate perhaps.  I'm very willing to say old school TKD included great striking along with a decent amount of judo throwing, perhaps some rudimentary wrist locks... More than that?  I dunno - but it would make a good discussion.


----------



## Cyriacus

dancingalone said:


> I share a lot of the same feelings, but to be fair can we truly say all those things were part of classic TKD?  Classic karate perhaps.  I'm very willing to say old school TKD included great striking along with a decent amount of judo throwing, perhaps some rudimentary wrist locks... More than that?  I dunno - but it would make a good discussion.


It does - Its just that its not the archetypical "Ground Fighting" that probably springs to mind. The Chokes? Definitely. Locking tends to be less favored compared to just holding someone for a second then hitting them, but its there. Grappling is there, but again, not in the archetypical context which springs to mind. And so forth.

Now Im just going to sit back and sip some Lemonade whilst someone inevitably starts going on about TKD being stolen from Karate and all that jazz.


----------



## dancingalone

Cyriacus said:


> It does - Its just that its not the archetypical "Ground Fighting" that probably springs to mind. The Chokes? Definitely. Locking tends to be less favored compared to just holding someone for a second then hitting them, but its there. Grappling is there, but again, not in the archetypical context which springs to mind. And so forth.



I would like it if historically that was true.  May I ask what reference you read to support that conclusion?   The reason why I question it somewhat is because General Choi brought in a hapkido expert to develop a hosinsul curriculum.  Assuming a substantial inside fighting practice already existed in his taekwondo, this would not have been necessary.

Thanks!


----------



## miguksaram

Cyriacus said:


> It does - Its just that its not the archetypical "Ground Fighting" that probably springs to mind. The Chokes? Definitely. Locking tends to be less favored compared to just holding someone for a second then hitting them, but its there. Grappling is there, but again, not in the archetypical context which springs to mind. And so forth.
> 
> Now Im just going to sit back and sip some Lemonade whilst someone inevitably starts going on about TKD being stolen from Karate and all that jazz.


Can you point out in the Shotokan syllabus where locks, traps, chokes and ground fighting was taught....Not being an ***...I just never saw it in the Shotokan books that I have....since TKD's roots are mostly Shotokan, especially the ITF branch, I would like to find out why it was not taught, if it was taught in Shotokan.


----------



## dancingalone

miguksaram said:


> Can you point out in the Shotokan syllabus where locks, traps, chokes and ground fighting was taught....Not being an ***...I just never saw it in the Shotokan books that I have....since TKD's roots are mostly Shotokan, especially the ITF branch, I would like to find out why it was not taught, if it was taught in Shotokan.



It's commonly accepted that these things were never taught in pre-WWII Shotokan.  No kobudo weapons either.  The students at the Japanese universities either weren't interested in them or Funakoshi Sensei didn't think it important or necessary for whatever reason.  

Some have theorized that the use of bayonets and rifles as primary arms for Japanese infantry soldiers at the time left little concern for learning much else.  Meanwhile the focus on empty hand sparring was a means of building martial spirit in the university youth.


----------



## miguksaram

dancingalone said:


> It's commonly accepted that these things were never taught in pre-WWII Shotokan.  No kobudo weapons either.  The students at the Japanese universities either weren't interested in them or Funakoshi Sensei didn't think it important or necessary for whatever reason.
> 
> Some have theorized that the use of bayonets and rifles as primary arms for Japanese infantry soldiers at the time left little concern for learning much else.  Meanwhile the focus on empty hand sparring was a means of building martial spirit in the university youth.



Thank you.  So the original Shotokan curriculum as taught by Funakoshi Sensei and his son and several of his 1st generation students did not include chokes, traps, locks, ground fighting correct?


----------



## miguksaram

If Mst. Weiss is reading through this perhaps he can chime in and let us know if original ITF syllabus contained these techniques as well.


----------



## dancingalone

miguksaram said:


> Thank you.  So the original Shotokan curriculum as taught by Funakoshi Sensei and his son and several of his 1st generation students did not include chokes, traps, locks, ground fighting correct?



Yes, by my understanding.  When I have some time to comb through my messy study, perhaps I can source it here.


----------



## Cyriacus

dancingalone said:


> I would like it if historically that was true.  May I ask what reference you read to support that conclusion?   The reason why I question it somewhat is because General Choi brought in a hapkido expert to develop a hosinsul curriculum.  Assuming a substantial inside fighting practice already existed in his taekwondo, this would not have been necessary.
> 
> Thanks!


There were 12 Founders - And the Chokes and Jointlocks are very straightforward. 
Now, I do have a book laying around old enough to have black and white Photos I could use as a reference. Ill see if I can find it. I remember its name, but given that its name is Taekwon-Do, the Author would probably be more helpful in this case.

In addition though, Inside Fighting is I suppose My Point. When thinking Grappling You normally thing of Grappling in a normal sense, as oppose to grabbing someones forearm, pulling it accross, and punching them in the face. But thats semantics. That said, in the ITF, I saw some Hapkido style stuff, so I full well agree that in some cases, Youre probably correct. Ive also seen many completely functional workings which are nothing like Hapkido in non-ITF Dojangs.
That said, why would it need to be Substancial? It isnt the Focus.



miguksaram said:


> Can you point out in the Shotokan syllabus where locks, traps, chokes and ground fighting was taught....Not being an ***...I just never saw it in the Shotokan books that I have....since TKD's roots are mostly Shotokan, especially the ITF branch, I would like to find out why it was not taught, if it was taught in Shotokan.



Honestly, Im the wrong person to ask. I havent done much Research into Shotokan. I was mostly playing on DancingAlone mentioning that Hed more expect it to be in Karate.
Im interested as well, though.
Theres another factor though, which is how many kinds of Shotokan there are.
In fact, really, Shotokan can be as bad as TKD in the variance of Methodologies between Organisations.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

miguksaram said:


> Why does one have to lower the standards? Harvard has not lowered their standards, just because some people cannot hack it once they got in.


Not at all a good analogy. People who go to Harvard go because they believe that a degree from that institution will enable them to go further in their chosen professsin and to become wealthy, thus offsetting the costs of attending the school. Not to mention that the university system has a *lot* of help from various industries as well as state and federal governments. 

Martial arts schools, even good ones, do not offer the promise of greater professional prestige and wealth as a result of getting their blackbelt, and martial arts are held in the same regard as football or baseball, only without the potential for celebrity athlete income or the possibility of making the pros. 

I have seen MA lessons compared to piano and violin lessons. Or dance lessons. The major difference is that piano, violin, and ballet are also an established part of upper income culture in the west. Martial arts are not. 



miguksaram said:


> At our school we have a set standard which students must adhere to in order to pass to the next belt. If they do not meet the standard they do not test, it is that simple. A average minimum time for even a Jr. BB is 5 years and they do have to be a minimum age as well. That is not to say that being in somewhere longer means better. We have had some kids do it in three years. My point is that we set forth the criteria and standards that each student has to meet. As long as you are confident in what you do and you are providing excellent instruction at a fair price for not only the customer but for yourself as well then why lower standards?


I think that a lot depends on what you consider good money and fair pricing. I'm sure that the ATA considers its pricing to be fair. Given that they tend to target more affluent areas (from what I understand) their pricing is probably in line with their target customers' imcome levels. 

While I think that it can be done, most instructors of commerical schools with an ATA style formula probably learned in a school with an ATA style formula, and so they do what they have seen done. 

That is:

Higher tuition to take advantage of more affluent suburban family incomes.
Escalating belt fees or an overpriced fee for promotions.
Proliferation of belts in order to maximize the fees above.
Training to test and not to get better, which puts a focus on both of the above.
Special clubs and programs with fees attached.
Training needed for promotion withheld from regular students unless they participate in the aforementioned clubs and/or programs
Standards of promotion relaxed in order to have students paying for promotions consistently.
Promotion of students is scheduled in order to maintain consistency with the aforementioned fees.
The blackbelt promotion is considered graduation, with the expectation that most students will check it off of their bucket list and move onto another activity.
The black belt test costs more than three months of tuition in order to grab as much cash as possible before the student graduates and checks it off of their bucket list and moves onto another activity.
Black belts who stay are hit with fees for new equipment that often must be purchased through the school at a non competitive price.
I'm sure that I could add to that list, but I think that it is a pretty thorough list of the highlights of modern MA school commercialization.

And it is is commercialization that I see as a problem; not fair compensation, which is what you argue (and I agree) should be possible without sacrifice of training standards.


----------



## dancingalone

miguksaram said:


> This was pretty much a norm in most karate schools back in the day.  I had a couple of my seniors in my school tell me how lucky I was to learn half a form in a months time.  Stating they would be happy if that got to learn 3 more moves within that time frame.  I could be wrong but don't some kung fu schools teach in this way?  They show you only so much of  form per ranking?



Kung fu sets are generally SO LONG, it would be quite difficult to learn a complete form in a short period of time.  Short ones can be the equivalent of stringing together 3-4 dan length karate kata.  

When I studied cha quan as well as baji quan, I didn't start to learn one of the traditional full sets until I was nearly a year into practice, and that was only after learning tan tui (essentially lines of marching basics). Lots of basics/conditioning though.


----------



## Gemini

miguksaram said:


> I know of a several very successful TKD schools that has not watered down their standards and still make good money.


That's kind of the point I was trying to make. So do I, but I know more that when faced with losing their school have made concessions to keep attendance up, went to the dark side because quality of training has become secondary to profit or lost their business outright because they refused to do so and watched their attendance migrate to one of the always present local chains that offer belts every 10 minutes, weapons galore at yellow belt and day care. I'm witnessing a very close friend go through this right now and it's heart breaking. He's by far a much more capable martial artist both in capability and experience, but not as good a business man. Your experience may well paint a different picture, but my experience says it's an uphill battle.




miguksaram said:


> yet many people scold those who do make a good living at it.  This is the part that I don't get.


I'm sorry you've experienced that because I have never heard anybody speak ill of those who ran a successful business while maintaining a high standard of training. I applaud it and so do those who know what it takes to pull that off. I wish you continued success!


----------



## clfsean

dancingalone said:


> Kung fu sets are generally SO LONG, it would be quite difficult to learn a complete form in a short period of time.  Short ones can be the equivalent of stringing together 3-4 dan length karate kata.



Truth... shortest sets I know are not much more that a couple of drills put together. 

Longest one I know takes me about 5 minutes at a full run. Great for cardio death practice!!



dancingalone said:


> When I studied cha quan as well as baji quan, I didn't start to learn one of the traditional full sets until I was nearly a year into practice, and that was only after learning tan tui (essentially lines of marching basics). Lots of basics/conditioning though.



Exactly. Most of the time in doing drills & such, you're learning pieces taken from the sets... individual motions up to several at a time. By the time you get to a set, you actually know most of the content, but not the order in stringing it together. But that takes time & effort. I tend go a little quicker than some. It normally takes me 6 months to start teaching sets. I teach lots of drills & combos, but no sets. 

When I teach a set, I teach four moves a class, no more than eight a week, no matter how times a week a person comes to class. Before a set is taught, I'm teaching combos from that set for a month or so ahead of time to make the process simple. Not easy, because it's not, but simple. But we're working on applications, practical format & per motion from the set.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

dancingalone said:


> I share a lot of the same feelings, but to be fair can we truly say all those things were part of classic TKD?  Classic karate perhaps.  I'm very willing to say old school TKD included great striking along with a decent amount of judo throwing, perhaps some rudimentary wrist locks... More than that?  I dunno - but it would make a good discussion.



I can relay that it was taught, as part of the TKD curriculum by a Korean GM to my instructor.  Was it wide spread?  Apparently not, but some did teach it as part of the curriculum since this is what they, in turn, where taught.



			
				dancingalone said:
			
		

> It's commonly accepted that these things were never taught in pre-WWII  Shotokan.  No kobudo weapons either.  The students at the Japanese  universities either weren't interested in them or Funakoshi Sensei  didn't think it important or necessary for whatever reason.





			
				miguksaram said:
			
		

> So the original Shotokan curriculum as taught by Funakoshi Sensei and  his son and several of his 1st generation students did not include  chokes, traps, locks, ground fighting correct?



I would say this is incorrect.  Abernethy Sensei references many of Funakoshi Sensei's writings for the techniques I have described.  He is but one that has demonstrated the historical links in the writings of the seniors.  I would refer anyone interested to take some time, review his articles on the Pinan/Heian series, his (and others) articles on what the senior in Shotokan (and other arts) taught and simply ask him directly if any questions arise.  He operates a small discussion board as well as Jissen which is an online, free magazine.


----------



## miguksaram

dancingalone said:


> Kung fu sets are generally SO LONG, it would be quite difficult to learn a complete form in a short period of time.  Short ones can be the equivalent of stringing together 3-4 dan length karate kata.
> 
> When I studied cha quan as well as baji quan, I didn't start to learn one of the traditional full sets until I was nearly a year into practice, and that was only after learning tan tui (essentially lines of marching basics). Lots of basics/conditioning though.


I remember Tantui practice from my Northern Shaolin study...Only did about 6 months of that though.  It was fun but the instructor did it as a side thing and his real job would often cause class cancellations.


----------



## dancingalone

Kong Soo Do said:


> I can relay that it was taught, as part of the TKD curriculum by a Korean GM to my instructor.  Was it wide spread?  Apparently not, but some did teach it as part of the curriculum since this is what they, in turn, where taught.



What time period did this Korean GM learn in?  From which [presumeably] kwan?




Kong Soo Do said:


> I would say this is incorrect.  Abernethy Sensei references many of Funakoshi Sensei's writings for the techniques I have described.  He is but one that has demonstrated the historical links in the writings of the seniors.  I would refer anyone interested to take some time, review his articles on the Pinan/Heian series, his (and others) articles on what the senior in Shotokan (and other arts) taught and simply ask him directly if any questions arise.  He operates a small discussion board as well as Jissen which is an online, free magazine.



There are some writings and printed interviews by and with Funakoshi Sensei's students.  I will source them when I can.  I really think they reflect that Funakoshi Sensei did not teach much in the way of grappling at all.  I don't argue that Funakoshi knew the close range - he would have as an Okinawan karate man.  Whether he actively taught such to his Japanese students is another matter.

By the way, I should probably state for the record that Funakoshi Sensei did include some throws in his Kyohan as well as the earlier version of the book.  But I do question how often did the pre-war Shotokan practice that material along with locks or muscle and tendon displacing methods.


----------



## miguksaram

Gemini said:


> He's by far a much more capable martial artist both in capability and experience,* but not as good a business man.* Your experience may well paint a different picture, but my experience says it's an uphill battle.


This is what I think is at the heart of the problem.  Many great instructors are not so great business people.  When this happens they tend to fall into the this glitch that we are seeing now.  



> I'm sorry you've experienced that because I have never heard anybody speak ill of those who ran a successful business while maintaining a high standard of training. I applaud it and so do those who know what it takes to pull that off. I wish you continued success!


No...no..hasn't happened to me yet...I am still working hard to get into that position of success so people can call me a sell out.ha.ha.ha.ha


----------



## miguksaram

Kong Soo Do said:


> I can relay that it was taught, as part of the TKD curriculum by a Korean GM to my instructor.  Was it wide spread?  Apparently not, but some did teach it as part of the curriculum since this is what they, in turn, where taught.


The roots you are talking about, are coming from a different style of karate though correct?  Also, was what your GM taught directly from his karate or from other martial arts that he studied and then he intertwined with his lessons?  Just curious.



> I would say this is incorrect.  Abernethy Sensei references many of Funakoshi Sensei's writings for the techniques I have described.  He is but one that has demonstrated the historical links in the writings of the seniors.  I would refer anyone interested to take some time, review his articles on the Pinan/Heian series, his (and others) articles on what the senior in Shotokan (and other arts) taught and simply ask him directly if any questions arise.  He operates a small discussion board as well as Jissen which is an online, free magazine.


I know of him, but is this based on his sole interpretation or actual written documents from Funakoshi Sensei?  There is a difference.  If it is something that Funakoshi Sensei did write in his books, I would like to know which ones to add to my collection as well as figure out why it was excluded by the TKD pioneers.


----------



## puunui

Kong Soo Do said:


> Actually, and with respect, it has not always been done this way.  Itosu Sensei as just one example was a full time college professor.  Martial arts was something that was a way of life rather than an occupational pursuit.  China is another example.  Teaching as a commercial venture did not really get into full swing until after WWII.




Incorrect. There are many examples of martial arts practitioners teaching as a commercial venture. TAKEDA Sokaku Sensei for one. Those that taught samurai from the earliest times. There is a long history of teaching martial arts professionally that goes back centuries. Funakoshi Sensei in Japan was a full time martial arts instructor. Mabuni Sensei in Japan, same thing.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

miguksaram said:


> This is what I think is at the heart of the problem. Many great instructors are not so great business people. When this happens they tend to fall into the this glitch that we are seeing now.


This is how many great instructors end up doing the McDojo thing; the formula has already been made to order, tried out and tweeked.  When running into difficulty with  business, all said sensei need to do is adopt the McDojo model and hire a billing company with contracts.  In order to maximize belt test money, standards are dropped and/or more belts are added.  And that is how it all begins...


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> It's commonly accepted that these things were never taught in pre-WWII Shotokan.  No kobudo weapons either.  The students at the Japanese universities either weren't interested in them or Funakoshi Sensei didn't think it important or necessary for whatever reason.



GM LEE Won Kuk did say that he learned bo and some sai. He even demonstrated some bo techniques for me on video (without the bo). But the other stuff, the locking, ground stuff, etc., he never learned and never taught it. It wasn't part of the shotokan curriculum, at least when he was there. There are some photographs in Funakoshi Sensei's early book toude jutsu, but that wasn't covered in Japan. GM Lee said that people weren't interested in that stuff when they came to karate, they wanted to learn kicking and punching. If they wanted weapons they would learn kendo. If they wanted grappling they would take judo or jujitsu. If they wanted kicking and punching, they learned karate.


----------



## puunui

Getting back to the original subject, I really cannot see why so many people get upset at the thought of a five year old black belt. Who cares? Personally, I am not in any way diminished, threatened, harmed, lowered or hurt by a five year old black belt or even a 4th Dan teenager. I like to think my self esteem is higher than feeling those kinds of things. That really is the crux of the matter, people feeling somehow lowered by a five year old.


----------



## miguksaram

Daniel Sullivan said:


> This is how many great instructors end up doing the McDojo thing; the formula has already been made to order, tried out and tweeked.  When running into difficulty with  business, all said sensei need to do is adopt the McDojo model and hire a billing company with contracts.  In order to maximize belt test money, standards are dropped and/or more belts are added.  And that is how it all begins...


Right...and to be fair some of these martial art marketing companies like MAIA, have some great ideas.  You just have to learn to pick adapt it to your principals and style and not the other way around.  I loved going to their seminars when I attended the MAIA shows.  You would get some great business insight and tips from people who were successful.  Not everything they said would fit within what I wanted, but that was ok.  I really focused on things that did/does fit into what I need to accomplish.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

dancingalone said:


> What time period did this Korean GM learn in?  From which [presumeably] kwan?



I cannot give you an exact, so I will estimate.  GM Dunn was back in the 80's, Master Kyu In Baik was at the time (if memory serves) an 8th Dan in the HMK.  I did not know him, and he is now deceased.  But GM Dunn thought and spoke highly of him.  Going backward from the 80's for an 8th Dan would 'probably' put him as starting back in the 50's or 60's?  I cannot be dogmatic about it, I am only giving a general estimate.  

GM Dunn earned his first BB in Goju Ryu on Okinawa in the 60's and much of what was taught was similar.  Not saying HMK comes from Goju, just demonstrating similar concepts and techniques existed between the two.  And I am not stating that any other HMK senior taught in this fashion or that it was a philosophy of the Kwan.  Only that at least one individual senior, within the Kwan had such training and passed it on.  



			
				miguksaram said:
			
		

> The roots you are talking about, are coming from a different style of  karate though correct?  Also, was what your GM taught directly from his  karate or from other martial arts that he studied and then he  intertwined with his lessons?  Just curious.



The roots of the HMK would be (depending upon whom you ask) JDK and/or YMK.  [FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Gichin Funakoshi taught Shotokan Karate to *Chun, Sang Sup* at the College at Dong Yang Chuck Sik (Takushoku) University in Japan in the early to mid 1930's.  Whether or not JDK was involved directly or indirectly again depends on whom you talk with and how you view it.  But I believe the GM LEE links directly to GM Chun, Sang Sup so Shotokan would be a viable consideration.  

I know that there were very close ties with Hapkido at one point.  So I cannot be dogmatic on this point.  

In regards to Master Abernethy, He references many source books of Funakoshi Sensei and others.  I'd have to refer you to his site and articles as I can't remember off hand at the moment.  
[/FONT]


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

puunui said:


> Getting back to the original subject, I really cannot see why so many people get upset at the thought of a five year old black belt. Who cares? Personally, I am not in any way diminished, threatened, harmed, lowered or hurt by a five year old black belt or even a 4th Dan teenager. I like to think my self esteem is higher than feeling those kinds of things. That really is the crux of the matter, people feeling somehow lowered by a five year old.


I think that a lot of it has to do with what a black belt has come to mean in the states how that meaning was communicated by people, such as US servicemen, who brought arts back to the states.  Since they weren't training kids, the image of a black belt was a big, tough, ex marine who had trained hard in the art's country of origin and was attracting students similar to himself.

The idea that the belt was for competition bracketing was lost and now it almost seems foreign to many people.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Kong Soo Do said:


> This is the way that Uechi Kanbun Sensei trained in China. This is the way he taught. His presentation of kata was so powerful, that historically, no one at demonstrations would follow him. It taught not only the form, and more importantly the bukai but also patience.
> 
> I have patterned our single form in MSK Kong Soo Do after this principle. *Just one movement sequence of the 25 in the form could easily last MULTIPLE classes. *We don't follow the philosophy of 'do a form, get a colored belt, repeat'. Very little training takes place that way. Our philosophy is quality rather than quantity.


I like this!


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I like this!



Thank you.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Kong Soo Do said:


> Thank you.


You're welcome!

To elaborate, repetition of a small selection of techniques for a period of weeks internalizes those techniques.  Generally, the issue that I see with schools that have rapid belt advancement (as in two years or less) is not the rapidity of the advancement but that the students are only in the class maybe once or twice a week and are often not practicing outside of class consistently.  There is no way with a 'ten geubs in two years or less' schedule for students to get the depth in the technique that one needs to have with foundational material before moving on to more advanced material.

My kendo students spend a solid three or four months on essentially three basic strikes and four variations of two of those strikes, four basic parries, basic footwork, one basic posture, distance, and zanshin after striking.  That is it.  I do not introduce kata until later in the curriculum.   

I have seven grades prior to first dan: beginner, then 6th to 1st kyu.  Beginner is a three month session.  6th kyu introduces no new techniques, but introduces suburi (repetitive cutting exercises), nidan waza (two strike/step combinations) and oji waza (defensive techniques coupled with counter attacks from the strikes the students learned in the beginner session).  The beginner session is long enough for newbies to get a good idea of what class is like and what kendo is about and to decide if they want to commit to more.

I do not allow students to put on bogu until about fouth kyu as a rule of thumb (there are exceptions).  Essentially, students are looking at roughly eight to ten months of technical training and conditioning before doing any kind of sparring.

When I was asked to take the taekwondo classes at times when the instructor was unable to make class, my teaching methodology was pretty much the same; lots of line drills and repetitive kicking and punching drills.


----------



## dancingalone

Kong Soo Do said:


> GM Dunn earned his first BB in Goju Ryu on Okinawa in the 60's



Do you know who taught GM Dunn Goju-ryu?  He might very well know my own teacher, which would make us martial cousins of sorts.


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Generally, the issue that I see with schools that have rapid belt advancement (as in two years or less) is not the rapidity of the advancement but that the students are only in the class maybe once or twice a week and are often not practicing outside of class consistently.  There is no way with a 'ten geubs in two years or less' schedule for students to get the depth in the technique that one needs to have with foundational material before moving on to more advanced material.




FUNAKOSHI Gichin Sensei promoted his first group of 1st Dan after 18 months of training. Do you disagree with what he did?


----------



## dancingalone

puunui said:


> FUNAKOSHI Gichin Sensei promoted his first group of 1st Dan after 18 months of training. Do you disagree with what he did?



It may have been the right thing to do in his time, in his setting.  On the other hand, Miyagi Sensei, generally considered Funakoshi Sensei's senior in karate circles on Okinawa, never awarded dan ranks himself - probably something he considered right for his own circumstances.  

Arguably, we have veered too far in the direction of it being 'easy' to earn a BB, child or not.  It's OK IMO to adjust with the times in a dynamic fashion and require a higher bar of knowledge and performance for the rank.


----------



## Tez3

puunui said:


> FUNAKOSHI Gichin Sensei promoted his first group of 1st Dan after 18 months of training. Do you disagree with what he did?



Surely that depends on how often they trained? it could be 18 months of 8 hours a day or 18 months of two hours a week. The 18 months doesn't mean anything to us as a time for training unless we know how often they trained.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I think that a lot of it has to do with what a black belt has come to mean in the states how that meaning was communicated by people, such as US servicemen, who brought arts back to the states.  Since they weren't training kids, the image of a black belt was a big, tough, ex marine who had trained hard in the art's country of origin and was attracting students similar to himself.
> 
> The idea that the belt was for competition bracketing was lost and now it almost seems foreign to many people.



It's a foreign idea precisely because the meaning and purpose of a belt rank has grown way past what it originally meant in Judo.  You have a BB in hapkido, correct?  What does it mean to you there?  Do you have hapkido tournaments where it is necessary to group competitors into brackets? 

I'm privileged to hold a BB in Aikikai aikido - we don't have tournaments.  What my belt means is that I have a level of proficiency within the curriculum associated with my rank.  Luckily, it's a real measure of competence since standards in aikido are generally high.  There's not a lot of different belt colors and rank advancement isn't necessarily stressed - instead skill and execution is.  It's rare that I see an aikido dan that I think isn't up to snuff - the opposite is true in TKD and karate, the other arts I hold BBs in.

I'd like to see a bit more of this rigor within TKD in general.  (I am sure most of us here are associated with great schools with high standards by the way.)


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> I'm privileged to hold a BB in Aikikai aikido - we don't have tournaments.  What my belt means is that I have a level of proficiency within the curriculum associated with my rank.  Luckily, it's a real measure of competence since standards in aikido are generally high.  There's not a lot of different belt colors and rank advancement isn't necessarily stressed - instead skill and execution is.  It's rare that I see an aikido dan that I think isn't up to snuff - the opposite is true in TKD and karate, the other arts I hold BBs in. I'd like to see a bit more of this rigor within TKD in general.  (I am sure most of us here are associated with great schools with high standards by the way.)



Do you think it is appropriate or even fair to judge a non-aikido art by aikido standards? Or should we simply go with what the arts themselves establish for rank and promotion and set forth by the headquarters of the art? I hear eskimos cast their elderly away when they have no value to the group. Personally, I would never do that to my parents. Should I then condemn eskimos for how they treat their elderly, assuming that is what they actually do? Personally, I have no opinion about aikido's rank structure or any other art's rank structure other than the ones that I study personally. And I don't care what they do. Frankly, I don't even care what other instructors do in the arts that I do study. The standards they use to assess their students is their business, not mine.


----------



## puunui

Tez3 said:


> Surely that depends on how often they trained? it could be 18 months of 8 hours a day or 18 months of two hours a week. The 18 months doesn't mean anything to us as a time for training unless we know how often they trained.




I don't think it was 8 hours per day for 18 months. His first students were educated working people if I remember correctly. But I can go check later.


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> Arguably, we have veered too far in the direction of it being 'easy' to earn a BB, child or not.  It's OK IMO to adjust with the times in a dynamic fashion and require a higher bar of knowledge and performance for the rank.



Arguably, we are just right, since the ATA or Kukkiwon allows such things. If they are ok with it, what concern is it of ours? If you wish to promote only 18 year olds and above according to your own high strict standards, I don't think the Kukkiwon or ATA would stand in judgment of you or otherwise tell you what to do.


----------



## dancingalone

puunui said:


> Do you think it is appropriate or even fair to judge a non-aikido art by aikido standards? Or should we simply go with what the arts themselves establish for rank and promotion and set forth by the headquarters of the art? I hear eskimos cast their elderly away when they have no value to the group. Personally, I would never do that to my parents. Should I then condemn eskimos for how they treat their elderly, assuming that is what they actually do? Personally, I have no opinion about aikido's rank structure or any other art's rank structure other than the ones that I study personally. And I don't care what they do. Frankly, I don't even care what other instructors do in the arts that I do study. The standards they use to assess their students is their business, not mine.



I think it's a fair comparison to make when people bring in the judo argument, saying that black belts are meant only for seeding/matching competitive pairings.  Clearly many arts have adopted the judo dan system, and likewise they probably all have gathered meaning to the rank beyond competitive purposes. 

And my interest in what TKD belt ranks mean come from my holding black belts in TKD myself.  As do my niece and nephew.  And I even am the proud new owner of a commercial TKD dojang as of last quarter.  I care a lot about the subject - I hope understandably so.


----------



## dancingalone

puunui said:


> Arguably, we are just right, since the ATA or Kukkiwon allows such things. If they are ok with it, what concern is it of ours? If you wish to promote only 18 year olds and above according to your own high strict standards, I don't think the Kukkiwon or ATA would stand in judgment of you or otherwise tell you what to do.



Certainly that's true in an abstract sense.  However, in practical sense, I am a commercial competitor offering martial arts instruction at my new property, including TKD.  What goes on elsewhere inevitably affects me, does it not?  Especially so if my own locale has some of this going on.

Granted I can adapt and turn lemons into lemonade as the saying goes, but I don't think it out of turn for me to be concerned about something that really does affect me.


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I think that a lot of it has to do with what a black belt has come to mean in the states how that meaning was communicated by people, such as US servicemen, who brought arts back to the states.  Since they weren't training kids, the image of a black belt was a big, tough, ex marine who had trained hard in the art's country of origin and was attracting students similar to himself.
> 
> The idea that the belt was for competition bracketing was lost and now it almost seems foreign to many people.



Or not, since students still spar according to belt rank in their dojang, even if they do not go to tournaments. For me, it is what it is today, and if we are so strict and hard on the lower ranks, then people will never progress to the upper ranks, which presents its own problems in the future.


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> Certainly that's true in an abstract sense.  However, in practical sense, I am a commercial competitor offering martial arts instruction at my new property, including TKD.  What goes on elsewhere inevitably affects me, does it not?  Especially so if my own locale has some of this going on.



I don't think so. There was a funny situation here recently. There was a high quality taekwondo school which regularly produces national champions at USAT events. Right below them on the ground floor was a karate school known as the original mcdojo of hawaii. The taekwondo school was strict but not overly so with promotions, and while the karate school was very liberal, the most liberal school here. Those who wanted easy went to the karate school. Those who wanted quality went to the taekwondo school. Both prospered. Eventually the taekwondo school moved to a bigger and better location, so no more of that. But it is true that the markets are different.


----------



## dancingalone

puunui said:


> I don't think so. There was a funny situation here recently. There was a high quality taekwondo school which regularly produces national champions at USAT events. Right below them on the ground floor was a karate school known as the original mcdojo of hawaii. The taekwondo school was strict but not overly so with promotions, and while the karate school was very liberal, the most liberal school here. Those who wanted easy went to the karate school. Those who wanted quality went to the taekwondo school. Both prospered. Eventually the taekwondo school moved to a bigger and better location, so no more of that. But it is true that the markets are different.



That probably a good example of product differentiation and something I aim to do with my school.  I don't think they are perfectly different markets however.  

I think there's a big cross-section of people who would be happy training in either a lax or a rigorous school.  Things like atmosphere or the social aspect or even the instructor are more important to them than the technical standard for school selection and retention.  I think people like that can make the difference in running a profitable school or not.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

dancingalone said:


> That probably a good example of product differentiation and something I aim to do with my school.  I don't think they are perfectly different markets however.
> 
> I think there's a big cross-section of people who would be happy training in either a lax or a rigorous school.  Things like atmosphere or the social aspect or even the instructor are more important to them than the technical standard for school selection and retention.  I think people like that can make the difference in running a profitable school or not.


I think the instructor makes a huge difference to the profitibility of the school. Its amazing what people will do to train under a good instructor. My new instructor has 80 students in his afternoon class and 70 students in his evening class. Some students travel well over an hour to get to class and probably drive past heaps of tkd clubs on their way and many of those classes are from our club. A really good instructor is very hard to find. Funny thing is that my instructor travels 3 hours to get to class, but he only works four hours a week so he has plenty of time on his hands


----------



## Kong Soo Do

puunui said:


> FUNAKOSHI Gichin Sensei promoted his first group of 1st Dan after 18 months of training. Do you disagree with what he did?



May I ask your source material?  The reason that I ask is I remember reading that in that first group, several were promoted directly to 2nd Dan.  I do not remember the length of training however.  Presumably they had trained longer than the ones promoted to first?

In the mid-50's Uechi Kanei Sensei adopted the Dan/kyu system.  In a mass promotion ceremony he promoted several to Godan (5th Dan), some to 4th Dan etc on down to 1st Dan.  However, the ones that were promoted higher had many years, some training with Uechi Kanbun Sensei.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

puunui said:


> FUNAKOSHI Gichin Sensei promoted his first group of 1st Dan after 18 months of training. Do you disagree with what he did?


I neither agree nor disagree; it is not my place to judge.  

I suspect that students of his practiced more rigorously outside of class than modern American students do.  All things considered, if students are practicing like the kids on the varsity football team, then eighteen months is probably plenty.

But having taught kids for several years, I know that that isn't how they are practicing by and large.  Same goes for adults, who mainly take the classes for enjoyment and fitness.  

Not a criticism; people are all different.  Funkoshi's students in prewar Japan had a different lifestyle than ATA students in the twenty first century.  I suspect that most people in Funakoshi's day (worldwide, not just in Japan) had a greater level of physicality in their lives than a modern TKD student in the US does outside of TKD.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I neither agree nor disagree; it is not my place to judge.
> 
> I suspect that students of his practiced more rigorously outside of class than modern American students do.  All things considered, if students are practicing like the kids on the varsity football team, then eighteen months is probably plenty.
> 
> But having taught kids for several years, I know that that isn't how they are practicing by and large.  Same goes for adults, who mainly take the classes for enjoyment and fitness.
> 
> Not a criticism; people are all different.  Funkoshi's students in prewar Japan had a different lifestyle than ATA students in the twenty first century.  I suspect that most people in Funakoshi's day (worldwide, not just in Japan) had a greater level of physicality in their lives than a modern TKD student in the US does outside of TKD.


Exactly. Very few kids, or adults for that matter, do anything outside the dojang other than a bit of 'cramming' the night before a test. The ones who do, its obvious they do. Doing form once or twice in class two times a week, doesnt get you real far, and you only have to watch most kids grading to see this is about the most they do. Any physical activity/sport that is new to someone takes a long time to commit to muscle memory and look fluent. For instance, I have never played baseball (I dont even know the rules), if I were to take baseball lessons for 1 hour twice a week and did no practice at all in my own time, I dont think I would progress vey quickly at all. Tkd is no different.


----------



## puunui

Kong Soo Do said:


> May I ask your source material?



It wasn't the internet, google or wikipedia.


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Not a criticism; people are all different.  Funkoshi's students in prewar Japan had a different lifestyle than ATA students in the twenty first century.



The prewar shotokan was different than the postwar shotokan that we see today. Kukki taekwondo is more similar to pre WWII shotokan than shotokan today, in my opinion, as strange as that sounds.


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> Granted I can adapt and turn lemons into lemonade as the saying goes, but I don't think it out of turn for me to be concerned about something that really does affect me.




Maybe it affects you, maybe not.


----------



## mastercole

puunui said:


> The prewar shotokan was different than the postwar shotokan that we see today. Kukki taekwondo is more similar to pre WWII shotokan than shotokan today, in my opinion, as strange as that sounds.



The Kukkiwon technical standards are very similar to what Funakoshi Sensei was doing before the Shotokan was built.  What the JKA and the Shotokai do today, is a variant of Funakoshi Sensei's pre WWII practice.  The inclusion of the high stance throughout the first three Taegeuk Poomsae of Taekwondo is a return to the original standard, shaking off the variant technique as a standard.  But some so-called traditionalist today are still practicing the variant, thinking it's the "traditional" standard, when it's not.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

> Originally Posted by *Kong Soo Do*
> 
> 
> 
> May I ask your source material?





puunui said:


> It wasn't the internet, google or wikipedia.



Why would you come back with a snide remark?  I asked a simple question with courtesy, and explained why I asked the question with courtesy.  Why not simply answer the question?  Or if you don't have actual source material to support your statement/question, then simply say so...with courtesy.


----------



## Tez3

puunui said:


> I don't think it was 8 hours per day for 18 months. His first students were educated working people if I remember correctly. But I can go check later.



I couldn't do 8 hours a day lol, I imagine it will have been something sensible.


----------



## Cyriacus

Kong Soo Do said:


> Why would you come back with a snide remark?  I asked a simple question with courtesy, and explained why I asked the question with courtesy.  Why not simply answer the question?  Or if you don't have actual source material to support your statement/question, then simply say so...with courtesy.


The irony is, all three of those are actually decent sources of Information. 
But yeah - If You dont have a source, You dont need one to debate a point. If You dont want to identify the source if it is a Person or somesuch, say as much.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

puunui said:


> The prewar shotokan was different than the postwar shotokan that we see today. Kukki taekwondo is more similar to pre WWII shotokan than shotokan today, in my opinion, as strange as that sounds.


That doesn't sound strange at all, but the nature of the art is not what I was getting at.  The art could be ballet or soccor.  I was referring to people's lives in general.

The lifestyle and outlook of a Japanese person fifty years ago is very different from that of an American person today.  Not a good/bad, but just different.  The lifestyle and outlook of an American person today is different than from fifty, or even thirty years ago too.  

When I took 'karate' as a kid, I had far fewer things to do than my own kids do.  Most of my play time was physical or I read books or drew and painted.  I spent a good hour a day practicing between classes because as a child, I was not athletic and not particularly coordinated, but I wanted to be.  There was no X-box or Playstation.  Not to mention that the amount of homework that came home for my kids far exceeded that of what came home when I was in elementary and junior high.  High school was about the same.

I also think that kids are much more coddled now than they used to be, mainly as a result of modern life having comparatively little physicality and prevailing attitudes toward discipline of children, particularly in the classroom.  Throw in the prevailing attitude of 'everyone is a winner, so nobody should ever lose, so everyone gets a trophy,' and you have a very different make up of students.

Not a criticism of modern kids or modern life, but it is a very different environment in which to teach martial arts.  The ATA *as it exists today*, flourishes, but could not have existed in Japan in Funakoshi Sensei's day.  Funakoshi Sensei could never have accomplished in the US today what he accomplished in *Japan in his day*.  

On the other hand, the guys who run the ATA are smart guys and would have found a way to flourish in Funakoshi Sensei's day, but their schools would have looked very different than they do now.  Funakoshi Sensei was a smart guy and certainly would be able to accomplish much today in the US, but he would likely have to go about it differently.  

Different times, different challenges.


----------



## dancingalone

> The karate that has been introduced to Tokyo is actually just a part of the whole. The fact that those who have learnt karate there feel it only consists of kicks & punches, and that throws & locks are only to be found in judo or jujutsu, can only be put down to a lack of understanding  Those who are thinking of the future of karate should have an open mind and strive to study the complete art  Kenwa Mabuni 1938


 Here is one quotation from Mabuni Kenwa Sensei in his Karatedo Nyumon and is relevant to the side discussion we've had about what was taught in pre-WWII Shotokan.  I believe Mabuni is referring to Shotokan karate above since he mentions Tokyo.  Mabuni Sensei taught in Osaka.


----------



## puunui

Kong Soo Do said:


> Why would you come back with a snide remark?  I asked a simple question with courtesy, and explained why I asked the question with courtesy.  Why not simply answer the question?  Or if you don't have actual source material to support your statement/question, then simply say so...with courtesy.



It wasn't a snide remark. It was courteous. I did simply answer the question. I do have actual source material for that information, which isn't the internet, google or wikipedia.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Then why not simply answer the question and list your source material?  It is an interesting discussion thus far, additional source material for research would add to the knowledge base of those interested.  Rather than going in circles about it, list your source material please.  Or simply state that you have no intentions of offering support for your post.  Thank you.


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> Here is one quotation from Mabuni Kenwa Sensei in his Karatedo Nyumon and is relevant to the side discussion we've had about what was taught in pre-WWII Shotokan.  I believe Mabuni is referring to Shotokan karate above since he mentions Tokyo.  Mabuni Sensei taught in Osaka.



What's the quote. I don't think it made into your post.


----------



## dortiz

The karate that has been introduced to Tokyo is actually just a part of the whole. The fact that those who have learnt karate there feel it only consists of kicks & punches, and that throws & locks are only to be found in judo or jujutsu, can only be put down to a lack of understanding  Those who are thinking of the future of karate should have an open mind and strive to study the complete art  Kenwa Mabuni 1938 


Here is one quotation from Mabuni Kenwa Sensei in his Karatedo Nyumon and is relevant to the side discussion we've had about what was taught in pre-WWII Shotokan. I believe Mabuni is referring to Shotokan karate above since he mentions Tokyo. Mabuni Sensei taught in Osaka.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

dortiz said:


> The karate that has been introduced to Tokyo is actually just a part of the whole. The fact that those who have learnt karate there feel it only consists of kicks & punches, and that throws & locks are only to be found in judo or jujutsu, can only be put down to a lack of understanding  Those who are thinking of the future of karate should have an open mind and strive to study the complete art  Kenwa Mabuni 1938
> 
> 
> Here is one quotation from Mabuni Kenwa Sensei in his Karatedo Nyumon and is relevant to the side discussion we've had about what was taught in pre-WWII Shotokan. I believe Mabuni is referring to Shotokan karate above since he mentions Tokyo. Mabuni Sensei taught in Osaka.



Excellent post!  Thank you for the quote


----------



## Kframe

My question is, Ignoring all the crap about there buisness practices and ways they try to soak money, is there teachings on par with TKD? Basicly what im saying is, if someone stays with them for say 10 years, and spends a gazillion dollars, and trains as hard as they can, is the techniques and basics and attacks and defenses teachings credible and on par with the other federations? From what im gathering its the buisness practices that are what give ATA there bad name, but im far more interested in there techniques and how they stack up. Punch for punch, kick for kick, block for block, throw for throw.  

I hear they made up forms that wernt in the original tkd? I thinking so what. If it teaches you something, like stringing together different moves and, how and when to move into which stance and so on and so forth. I dont see why it should matter if they came up with there own forms...

So technique wise, ignoring all else, how does there MA measure up.


----------



## Twin Fist

i dont want to say all, but i have never met an ATA blackbelt that could fight


----------



## puunui

dortiz said:


> The karate that has been introduced to Tokyo is actually just a part of the whole. The fact that those who have learnt karate there feel it only consists of kicks & punches, and that throws & locks are only to be found in judo or jujutsu, can only be put down to a lack of understanding &#8230; Those who are thinking of the future of karate should have an open mind and strive to study the complete art &#8211; Kenwa Mabuni 1938




That was in 1938. He later reversed his position and put all his energy into developing a competitive format for karate. In fact, he researched fighting full contact using equipment like chest protectors, head gear, gloves, shin protectors, a groin cup, all the things that taekwondo uses under the WTF rules. In fact, it was during a Japan Korea exchange with Dr. YON Kwai Byeong's old association that the first four hogu were brought back to Korea, and implemented into the KTA tournaments in the 1960s. 

Scroll down this page and see a photo of Mabuni Sensei wearing sparring equipment which looks remarkably like WTF approved sparring gear. Immediately below that you will see pictures of Mabuni Sensei demonstrating techniques primarily in a walking stance.

http://www.shito-ryu.it/usri/Storia...to-ryu/The History of Shito-Ryu Karate-Do.htm


----------



## Kong Soo Do

puunui said:


> That was in 1938. He later reversed his position and put all his energy into developing a competitive format for karate. In fact, he researched fighting full contact using equipment like chest protectors, head gear, gloves, shin protectors, a groin cup, all the things that taekwondo uses under the WTF rules. In fact, it was during a Japan Korea exchange with Dr. YON Kwai Byeong's old association that the first four hogu were brought back to Korea, and implemented into the KTA tournaments in the 1960s.
> 
> Scroll down this page and see a photo of Mabuni Sensei wearing sparring equipment which looks remarkably like WTF approved sparring gear. Immediately below that you will see pictures of Mabuni Sensei demonstrating techniques primarily in a walking stance.



Can you provide your source material for where he stated he was reversing his position from the above quote?  And, could you also provide your source material for your earlier quote regarding Shotokan?

And exactly how would him wearing protective equipment detract from his factual statement that Karate contained locks and throws?


----------



## dancingalone

puunui said:


> That was in 1938. He later reversed his position and put all his energy into developing a competitive format for karate. In fact, he researched fighting full contact using equipment like chest protectors, head gear, gloves, shin protectors, a groin cup, all the things that taekwondo uses under the WTF rules. In fact, it was during a Japan Korea exchange with Dr. YON Kwai Byeong's old association that the first four hogu were brought back to Korea, and implemented into the KTA tournaments in the 1960s.
> 
> Scroll down this page and see a photo of Mabuni Sensei wearing sparring equipment which looks remarkably like WTF approved sparring gear. Immediately below that you will see pictures of Mabuni Sensei demonstrating techniques primarily in a walking stance.
> 
> http://www.shito-ryu.it/usri/Storia/Le origini dello Shito-ryu/The History of Shito-Ryu Karate-Do.htm



Mabuni Sensei was indeed a supporter of sparring activities.  That said, I don't see how that is in conflict at all with his opinion that karate should be taught as a complete art with grappling and locks included.

I would be interested in seeing a later quotation from him where he changes his mind about that.


----------



## dancingalone

Krillan said:


> My question is, Ignoring all the crap about there buisness practices and ways they try to soak money, is there teachings on par with TKD? Basicly what im saying is, if someone stays with them for say 10 years, and spends a gazillion dollars, and trains as hard as they can, is the techniques and basics and attacks and defenses teachings credible and on par with the other federations? From what im gathering its the buisness practices that are what give ATA there bad name, but im far more interested in there techniques and how they stack up. Punch for punch, kick for kick, block for block, throw for throw.
> 
> I hear they made up forms that wernt in the original tkd? I thinking so what. If it teaches you something, like stringing together different moves and, how and when to move into which stance and so on and so forth. I dont see why it should matter if they came up with there own forms...
> 
> So technique wise, ignoring all else, how does there MA measure up.



ATA uses the same training modalities virtually every other TKD group does:  basics, forms, sparring, one steps, and self-defense.  So in that sense, their material is as good as anyone else.  I have a few quibbles about their hosinsul, but you could say the same about every group.

I do actively dislike the forms but that is because I am believe the old kata contain specific fighting instructions within them that are viable even today.  The Songahm hyung were drawn up to fit a specific floor embusen (their Songahm star) in contrast and IMO the strung together techniques do not combine well for real usage.


----------



## MSUTKD

Twin Fist said:


> i dont want to say all, but i have never met an ATA blackbelt that could fight



Actually Twin, I have met a couple of them.  There are two, that I know of who have moved over from ATA to USAT and do very well on a national level. One that I know will compete at US Team Trials in April. 

I have always felt it is really the athlete, not the "group" that makes a difference.


----------



## Cyriacus

MSUTKD said:


> Actually Twin, I have met a couple of them.  There are two, that I know of who have moved over from ATA to USAT and do very well on a national level. One that I know will compete at US Team Trials in April.
> 
> I have always felt it is really the athlete, not the "group" that makes a difference.


I feel that it works both ways - Take a good Athlete, like, a really good willing serious Martial Artists and dump them in a bad Dojang, and theyll eventually develop. Dump them in a good Dojang, and they will develop further and faster.


----------



## Twin Fist

i agree, but the thing is, even a star in an environment that doesnt demand and promote excellence usually wont produce excellence.


----------



## Kframe

So there forms are arranged so that they move in a star pattern, as opposed to a simulated multi attacker fight, and there techniques apparently art strung together well..  Now im starting to get a clearer picture of this group.. Gonna have to watch a few youtubes of them...


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> Mabuni Sensei was indeed a supporter of sparring activities.  That said, I don't see how that is in conflict at all with his opinion that karate should be taught as a complete art with grappling and locks included.
> 
> I would be interested in seeing a later quotation from him where he changes his mind about that.



It is not so much seeing a quotation, but rather seeing the effects of his actions, especially after WWII when all martial arts were banned. Only "sports" were allowed back, kendo, judo, and karatedo. 

In his Taekwondo Times interview, GM LEE Won Kuk mentioned pressure points being attacked. I later asked him about that and he said in Japan, only Otshuka Sensei focused part of his curriculum on that, because of his prior jujitsu background. I later touched on Mabuni Sensei and he considered him a martial arts genius. GM Lee said that Mabuni Sensei was better than FUNAKOSHI Gichin Sensei, who I believe learned the Pinan kata from Mabuni Sensei. According to GM Lee, Gichin Sensei later sent some of his students to learn additional kata from Mabuni Sensei, increasing the number of kata from 15 to its present number, twenty something. GM Lee said that the Shito Ryu curriculum was loaded with kata, sparring, and weapons, lots of kata, and something had to give, so it was the pressure point and jujitsu stuff. He said that students who came to learn karate wanted to learn to kick and punch, not press points or throw, that if they wanted that they would go to a judo or jujitsu school, not a karate school. 

And given that Mabuni Sensei was a professional martial art instructor, he had to give his students what they wanted, which was kicking and punching. That is why Mabuni Sensei was so interested in sparring, because his students were interested in that, just like the students at the Shotokan. If Gichin Sensei had his way, everyone would be punching the makiwara and doing only kata, but even he was flexible enough to see that wasn't the way.

You especially see it in what his students do, who have tended to be heavily into competition and not so much, if at all, into joint locks, throws or what have you. Even Mabuni Sensei's korean student, Dr. YON Kwai Byeong, was a big promoter of tournaments and competition, so much so that he was the one who set up those early exchange matches with Japan, and in doing so, brought back the first hogu from Japan, similar to the ones Mabuni Sensei is wearing in that photo. 

Picking out a comment from 15 years prior to his death is to me, misleading in what he had evolved to towards the end of his life. If you wish to see the man's teachings, take a look at his students, not his words. The biggest karate school here is a Shito Ryu school, and it is 100% competition, and has been since I could remember. They have world champions coming out of that club, and if Karate makes it to the Olympics, I have no doubt that there will be US Team members from that school in 2020 and beyond.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

puunui said:


> It is not so much seeing a quotation...



You're talking in circles Glenn.  Let's take a look at his statement again;



> The karate that has been introduced to Tokyo is actually just a part of the whole. The fact that those who have learnt karate there feel it only consists of kicks & punches, and that throws & locks are only to be found in judo or jujutsu, can only be put down to a lack of understanding  Those who are thinking of the future of karate should have an open mind and strive to study the complete art  Kenwa Mabuni 1938



As you put it yourself, he was considered a martial 'genius' and perhaps better than FUNAKOSHI Gichin Sensei, both of which (amoung others) stated that Karate included throws and locks.  So that is a factual statement from someone closer to the source of Okinawan Karate than anyone on the board.  It traces back to Itous Sensei who also used locks in real world altercations.  So the bottom line is that Karate contains much more than kicks and punches and it is simply a lack of understanding to consider it otherwise.  Regardless of whether or not he (and others) later included 'sport' applications later in life in no way, shape or form takes away from his quote.


----------



## puunui

Kong Soo Do said:


> You're talking in circles Glenn.



No, I'm answering dancingalone's question.



Kong Soo Do said:


> As you put it yourself, he was considered a martial 'genius' and perhaps better than FUNAKOSHI Gichin Sensei, both of which (amoung others) stated that Karate included throws and locks.  So that is a factual statement from someone closer to the source of Okinawan Karate than anyone on the board.  It traces back to Itous Sensei who also used locks in real world altercations.  So the bottom line is that Karate contains much more than kicks and punches and it is simply a lack of understanding to consider it otherwise.  Regardless of whether or not he (and others) later included 'sport' applications later in life in no way, shape or form takes away from his quote.



It does if he words do not match his actions, or the actions of his students. I remember dancingalone and I had a discussion about Funakoshi Gichin Sensei's attitudes towards competition. It was dancingalone's position that Gichin Sensei was against competition, that there was a quote early on which stated that. However, the direction of shotokan has been towards competition, in the tradition of other do arts like kendo and judo. Then, in his autobiography, written just before his death, there is a quote in there that states sparring or competition is ok. 

People change. Change signals growth. If you are thinking the exact same thoughts as you were fifteen years ago, then there really has been no growth. Read mastercole's or my stuff or look what the WTF was doing fifteen years ago and you would see a great deemphasis on poomsae. Not anymore. 

I can see you taking that quote and adding it in somehow to your lineage history, even though your lineage through the Han Moo Kwan has no connection to Mabuni Sensei. Dr. YON Kwai Byeong had some brief early training with Mabuni Sensei, and because of that Dr. Yon led exchange trips to Japan for sparring, which resulted in the hogu being brought back. We in taekwondo can thank Mabuni Sensei for that innovation, brought to us through his student Dr. Yon. Problem for your lineage is that Han Moo Kwan founder GM LEE Kyo Yun, who you claim a connection to, never studied under Dr. Yon. 

I suggest you ask mastercole about this, because I know that you have already included information from him on your webpage. Perhaps he can further clarify some things for you.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Hmm, once again, I'd agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong.


----------



## puunui

Kong Soo Do said:


> Hmm, once again, I'd agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong.



What do you disagree with, the fact that you changed your webpage after your email discussions with mastercole?


----------



## Kong Soo Do

puunui said:


> What do you disagree with, the fact that you changed your webpage after your email discussions with mastercole?



Not at all.  I disagree with much of what you've written in regards to Manbuni sensei stating that Karate contains far more than strikes and kicks.  I think others have disagreed with you as well.

Peace.


----------



## dancingalone

puunui said:


> In his Taekwondo Times interview, GM LEE Won Kuk mentioned pressure points being attacked. I later asked him about that and he said in Japan, only Otshuka Sensei focused part of his curriculum on that, because of his prior jujitsu background. I later touched on Mabuni Sensei and he considered him a martial arts genius. GM Lee said that Mabuni Sensei was better than FUNAKOSHI Gichin Sensei, who I believe learned the Pinan kata from Mabuni Sensei. According to GM Lee, Gichin Sensei later sent some of his students to learn additional kata from Mabuni Sensei, increasing the number of kata from 15 to its present number, twenty something. GM Lee said that the Shito Ryu curriculum was loaded with kata, sparring, and weapons, lots of kata, and something had to give, so it was the pressure point and jujitsu stuff. He said that students who came to learn karate wanted to learn to kick and punch, not press points or throw, that if they wanted that they would go to a judo or jujitsu school, not a karate school.



That is interesting what GM Lee said (all of it).  However, I would be somewhat surprised if Mabuni Sensei really had been the one to teach Funakoshi Sensei the Pinan forms.  Seems like he would have had the direct hookup from Itosu Sensei himself.

It is true that Shotokan owes some of their kata through the Shito-ryu connection.  This is corroborated with other interviews/writings outside of GM Lee.



puunui said:


> And given that Mabuni Sensei was a professional martial art instructor, he had to give his students what they wanted, which was kicking and punching. That is why Mabuni Sensei was so interested in sparring, because his students were interested in that, just like the students at the Shotokan. If Gichin Sensei had his way, everyone would be punching the makiwara and doing only kata, but even he was flexible enough to see that wasn't the way.



He was also a policeman before he became a professional instructor and reportedly used the full expression of karate to subdue criminals in Okinawa.  I tend to believe that experience would have heightened Mabuni Sensei's concern that karate should be taught with all the same material he himself learned as a student of both Itosu Sensei AND Higashionna Sensei, the later who decidedly did not have the same perspective the former did on teaching sanitized information.



puunui said:


> It is not so much seeing a quotation, but rather  seeing the effects of his actions, especially after WWII when all  martial arts were banned. Only "sports" were allowed back, kendo, judo,  and karatedo.
> ....
> 
> You especially see it in what his students do, who have tended to be heavily into competition and not so much, if at all, into joint locks, throws or what have you. Even Mabuni Sensei's korean student, Dr. YON Kwai Byeong, was a big promoter of tournaments and competition, so much so that he was the one who set up those early exchange matches with Japan, and in doing so, brought back the first hogu from Japan, similar to the ones Mabuni Sensei is wearing in that photo.
> 
> Picking out a comment from 15 years prior to his death is to me, misleading in what he had evolved to towards the end of his life. If you wish to see the man's teachings, take a look at his students, not his words. The biggest karate school here is a Shito Ryu school, and it is 100% competition, and has been since I could remember. They have world champions coming out of that club, and if Karate makes it to the Olympics, I have no doubt that there will be US Team members from that school in 2020 and beyond.



Many Shito-ryu schools indeed have turned to the sport path.  You probably know a lot of them on Hawaii, including the Kotaka-ha one that produced Elisa Au if that is the one you are referring to.  Whether that phenomenon is due to the restrictions placed on Japanese martial arts after WWII or not, I don't know but I acknowledge the state of affairs.  Look at those WKF tournaments.  Shito-ryu karate-ka are represented in abundance in them.

However, not Shito-ryu schools have such an extreme focus.  It's still one of the stronger karate styles for practicing bunkai, and my friends in Canada and elsewhere would be peturbed at the notion that they do not study the old tuite methods and other close-range, grappling techniques.  These are guys who have very short lines back to Mabuni Sensei, as close as my own (to toot my horn) back to Miyagi Sensei.  I've also had the fortune of interacting with Fumio Demura Sensei in the last decade and despite his past involvement in the movie industry, I can attest his knowledge of fighting applications are deep.  He likewise is a Shito-ryu man.

In any case, I don't want to make this an argument about sparring efficiacy if that is the misimpression some may have received from reading our conversation.  I AM a believer in sparring in TKD, in karate whatever flavor one practices.  But I do support the study as well of locking/joint manipulation and throwing within TKD and karate, and I believe Mabuni Sensei's opinion would have been the same from 1938 to his death in 1952.  I'm inclined to think the development of the karate tournament circuit occurred well after he had passed away.


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> He was also a policeman before he became a professional instructor and reportedly used the full expression of karate to subdue criminals in Okinawa.  I tend to believe that experience would have heightened Mabuni Sensei's concern that karate should be taught with all the same material he himself learned as a student of both Itosu Sensei AND Higashionna Sensei, the later who decidedly did not have the same perspective the former did on teaching sanitized information.



Using that logic, you would think that all of the taekwondo world and olympic gold medalists from korea who immigrated to the united states would be fully interested in pursuing competition as the number one priority at their schools. But the fact of the matter is that those world champions do not go that route and instead teach your typical non sparring curriculum that is common in commercial schools. People change, their focus changes when their circumstances change. Look at your own situation which has changed recently. Who knows what you will be doing and thinking fifteen years from now. 




dancingalone said:


> Many Shito-ryu schools indeed have turned to the sport path.  You probably know a lot of them on Hawaii, including the Kotaka-ha one that produced Elisa Au if that is the one you are referring to.  Whether that phenomenon is due to the restrictions placed on Japanese martial arts after WWII or not, I don't know but I acknowledge the state of affairs.  Look at those WKF tournaments.  Shito-ryu karate-ka are represented in abundance in them.



Yes, Kotaka Sensei's IKF was always the dominant tournament dojo, even when I was a little kid. It was almost inevitable that you would face an IKF member in the finals if you got that far. 



dancingalone said:


> I've also had the fortune of interacting with Fumio Demura Sensei in the last decade and despite his past involvement in the movie industry, I can attest his knowledge of fighting applications are deep.  He likewise is a Shito-ryu man.



Funny since his karate was extremely competition focused in his early days. Even he changed over the years. 




dancingalone said:


> In any case, I don't want to make this an argument about sparring efficiacy if that is the misimpression some may have received from reading our conversation.  I AM a believer in sparring in TKD, in karate whatever flavor one practices.  But I do support the study as well of locking/joint manipulation and throwing within TKD and karate, and I believe Mabuni Sensei's opinion would have been the same from 1938 to his death in 1952.  I'm inclined to think the development of the karate tournament circuit occurred well after he had passed away.



Actually, the karate competition phenomenon started in the 1930s in Japan, with the standardized uniform, belt ranks, and sparring were developed. I think Mabuni Sensei was sort of a renaisance man, equally comfortable going backwards toward "old knowledge" as well as being extremely forward looking. Taekwondo owes a debt of gratitude for his sparring equipment innovations, which allowed for full contact in taekwondo tournaments. 

Personally, I have nothing against finding bunkai from forms or even saying that there are such movements in forms. There are joint locking and other applications in the kukkiwon poomsae for example. I do think that it is probably more efficient to simply study jujutsu and hapkido if you wish to learn those. I can tell you that when I watch karate kata or taekwondo poomsae, they jump out at me if that is what I focus on, mainly because I have a hapkido background. I don't need to rely on other people's books or writings to help me find those. But if you are so inclined, knock yourself out. I am sure you see some too from your aikido background. 

But your comments do want me to go find a Mabuni Sensei quote to show his later thinking. I have books authored by Mabuni Sensei, but they are in the Japanese language. Let me get back to you on this. Over christmas, I counted my martial arts books. I have over 3500 total, about 1000 on korean martial arts. I also added about 200 last year, including some really expensive ones. Some years I buy more, other years less, depending on my mood, and also what opportunity brings to me.


----------



## dancingalone

puunui said:


> Using that logic, you would think that all of the taekwondo world and olympic gold medalists from korea who immigrated to the united states would be fully interested in pursuing competition as the number one priority at their schools. But the fact of the matter is that those world champions do not go that route and instead teach your typical non sparring curriculum that is common in commercial schools.



Maybe they are tired of traveling.  Or they recognize that the bulk of their students and customers are interested in something else.  You see the same thing with the wushu athletes.  They compete until physically they no longer are able to and then they move into teaching, frequently the so-called 'traditional' material like the 48 posture tai chi set which is arguably more enduring and popular.



puunui said:


> People change, their focus changes when their circumstances change. Look at your own situation which has changed recently. Who knows what you will be doing and thinking fifteen years from now.



Absolutely, change is a part of life.  Small changes though.  Not complete shifts in polarity.  Leopards don't lose their spots easily and neither do people change totally over time though.  If we strongly believe in something that has substance behind it in the first place, we don't easily shed it for the polar opposite.  



puunui said:


> Funny since his karate was extremely competition focused in his early days. Even he changed over the years.



Demura Sensei's karate has always had flair to it.  This was still the case 8 or so years ago, even though he is getting on in years.  I've never questioned the core roots behind it however.  He was kind enough to show me a tip on using my big toes within Seiunchin kata, something I have taken to heart and now teach others myself.



puunui said:


> Actually, the karate competition phenomenon started in the 1930s in Japan, with the standardized uniform, belt ranks, and sparring were developed.



It depends on what we mean by tournament circuit.  Certainly there were intra-university competitions during the 1930s.  The JKA wasn't established however until 1949.  And still later, the first incarnations of the WKF which brought together multiple styles and practitioners from different countries didn't come together until the 1960s.



puunui said:


> I think Mabuni Sensei was sort of a renaisance man, equally comfortable going backwards toward "old knowledge" as well as being extremely forward looking. Taekwondo owes a debt of gratitude for his sparring equipment innovations, which allowed for full contact in taekwondo tournaments.



He certainly was a supporter of jiyu kumite unlike some of his contemporaries.



puunui said:


> Personally, I have nothing against finding bunkai from forms or even saying that there are such movements in forms. There are joint locking and other applications in the kukkiwon poomsae for example. I do think that it is probably more efficient to simply study jujutsu and hapkido if you wish to learn those. I can tell you that when I watch karate kata or taekwondo poomsae, they jump out at me if that is what I focus on, mainly because I have a hapkido background. I don't need to rely on other people's books or writings to help me find  those. But if you are so inclined, knock yourself out. I am sure you  see some too from your aikido background.



But then you'd be practicing jujutsu or hapkido, not karate (which is what I refer to when mentioning bunkai above - I'm not really getting into the issue of adding to TKD, at least in this thread).  This can be important to those of us who DO practice applications out of our kata taught to us by our teachers using the principles and techniques recognizably a hallmark of our style and our system.  I understand there's a lot of people interested in form applications in general and they aren't necessarily concerned about about style specificity.  If it works, it's sufficient for them to copy and blend into their current practice.  And that's fine and all, but I wonder if they wouldn't be served better by picking from a source closest to what they actually practice as the training methods SHOULD align better towards the end application.

Certainly my aikido makes me a better martial artist paired with my Goju karate.  But does it make me a better Goju-ryu stylist?  It's something I often ponder when I have free time.



puunui said:


> But your comments do want me to go find a Mabuni Sensei quote to show his later thinking. I have books authored by Mabuni Sensei, but they are in the Japanese language. Let me get back to you on this. Over christmas, I counted my martial arts books. I have over 3500 total, about 1000 on korean martial arts. I also added about 200 last year, including some really expensive ones. Some years I buy more, other years less, depending on my mood, and also what opportunity brings to me.



You are a fortunate man.  I have a stack of Japanese karate magazines, none really all that old, but I treasure them as a gift from a dear friend of mine.  I'm trying to teach myself to be able to read them, but the process is a slow one.


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> Maybe they are tired of traveling.  Or they recognize that the bulk of their students and customers are interested in something else.  You see the same thing with the wushu athletes.  They compete until physically they no longer are able to and then they move into teaching, frequently the so-called 'traditional' material like the 48 posture tai chi set which is arguably more enduring and popular.
> 
> Absolutely, change is a part of life.  Small changes though.  Not complete shifts in polarity.  Leopards don't lose their spots easily and neither do people change totally over time though.  If we strongly believe in something that has substance behind it in the first place, we don't easily shed it for the polar opposite.



Those olympic and world champions did the switch, which is a 180 degree change. Mabuni Sensei may have faced similar sentiments, that while he was interested in the joint locking and throws, his students were not. They came to karate wanting to learn kicking and punching, not locking or throwing, which they all grew up with with judo. Weapons too. GM Lee said that most people during his time did not want to learn okinawan weapons. He said that to the japanese mind, nothing could compare to learning a sword, and learning okinawan weapons was like learning to use a frying pan or a garden trowel as a weapon. But they were interested in punching and kicking, especially since the japanese knew about western boxing. western culture was of strong interest to the japanese. 

I do think however that those world and olympic champions must miss the competition aspects, and with the right encouragement would like to start producing at least some athletes. 




dancingalone said:


> Demura Sensei's karate has always had flair to it.  This was still the case 8 or so years ago, even though he is getting on in years.  I've never questioned the core roots behind it however.  He was kind enough to show me a tip on using my big toes within Seiunchin kata, something I have taken to heart and now teach others myself.


 
It's always good to learn from senior teachers. I saw a cd from that masters magazine, and he seems like a very calm, down to earth type of person. 




dancingalone said:


> But then you'd be practicing jujutsu or hapkido, not karate (which is what I refer to when mentioning bunkai above - I'm not really getting into the issue of adding to TKD, at least in this thread).  This can be important to those of us who DO practice applications out of our kata taught to us by our teachers using the principles and techniques recognizably a hallmark of our style and our system.  I understand there's a lot of people interested in form applications in general and they aren't necessarily concerned about about style specificity.  If it works, it's sufficient for them to copy and blend into their current practice.  And that's fine and all, but I wonder if they wouldn't be served better by picking from a source closest to what they actually practice as the training methods SHOULD align better towards the end application.



I can understand your perspective and I think that is admirable, trying to maintain that sense of purity, so that things are not lost. You are especially lucky because you did learn your karate from a senior, someone closer to the source, so that probably helps to explain your outlook and your fortune. However, not everyone has that same perspective and they end up throwing everything in and calling it some sort of hidden application. For those people, I think they would be better served to learn jujitsu or hapkido. 




dancingalone said:


> Certainly my aikido makes me a better martial artist paired with my Goju karate.  But does it make me a better Goju-ryu stylist?  It's something I often ponder when I have free time.



Let us know what you come up with.




dancingalone said:


> You are a fortunate man.  I have a stack of Japanese karate magazines, none really all that old, but I treasure them as a gift from a dear friend of mine.  I'm trying to teach myself to be able to read them, but the process is a slow one.



What I do when I go to a japanese bookstore is to try to find the martial arts section by myself first, by looking at the signs. Sometimes I can find them and other times the section is so small that I need the assistance of a worker there. I usually end up buying a majority of the available books, which costs a small fortune. Japanese books are expensive, and the unfavorable exchange rate doesn't help. But what can you do. I want the books so I have to pay the price. It's life, wanting something and figuring out if you are willing and able to pay the price, in terms of money, time, dedication, whatever. When i was in NYC last summer I spent over $1000 on books, $200 or $300 on one okinawan karate encyclopedia alone. Alot of money when you consider I walked out with a single bag of books.


----------



## miguksaram

Dancingalone said:
			
		

> I've also had the fortune of interacting with Fumio Demura Sensei in the  last decade and despite his past involvement in the movie industry, I  can attest his knowledge of fighting applications are deep.  He likewise  is a Shito-ryu man.


We hosted him for a seminar a couple of times and I had the honor to be his chauffeur to and from the event and the dinners.  His seminars are excellent and he is a fascinating martial artist.  Our school adopted his beginners bo form to place in our curriculum.  He is an extremely humble and down to earth person.  When I drove him around he shared stories of not only martial arts but just everyday life.  I asked him how he would preferred to be addressed (Master, Renshi, Sensei, etc).   He said Sensei.  He told me once he figures out he mastered something then he will use that term.  He joked and said he was close to mastering a technique, but then woke up the next day and old age made him forget. ha.ha.ha

The best story was his explaining how back in the day there was really no animosity amongst styles that people would think.  He would train with other styles and they would all learn from each other.  He would ask a TKD master, I really like your kicks, show how you do that.  Or he would have TKD person come to him.  I like your bo techniques, show me how you do that.  And they would just train.  I highly recommend anyone, regardless of your rank and age, to attend a seminar if you can.  I am hoping to bring him back to the school again.


----------



## dancingalone

That is a nice story.  Thanks for sharing it!


----------



## miguksaram

dancingalone said:


> That is a nice story.  Thanks for sharing it!



One of the funnier ones that he told me was when he went to Chuck Norris's birthday party.  People were driving up in Mercedes and Jaguars and he pulls in with this old Toyota Camry.  Everyone was telling him that he should get a nice car and he just asked why. He said the car gets from here to there and back. Besides he traveled all the time so all a Mercedes will do is look good in his garage.


----------



## Twin Fist

agreed. My experiences with Tak Kabuta were pretty much the same. Humble, down to earth, and funny.


----------



## miguksaram

Twin Fist said:


> agreed. My experiences with Tak Kabuta were pretty much the same. Humble, down to earth, and funny.


I have heard he is a killer on the mat with the students though.


----------



## puunui

miguksaram said:


> The best story was his explaining how back in the day there was really no animosity amongst styles that people would think.  He would train with other styles and they would all learn from each other.  He would ask a TKD master, I really like your kicks, show how you do that.  Or he would have TKD person come to him.  I like your bo techniques, show me how you do that.  And they would just train.




I thought it was like that now. At least it is for me in my small little world.


----------



## Twin Fist

miguksaram said:


> I have heard he is a killer on the mat with the students though.


i uke'd for him once at an ATAMA seminar.

he is a firm believer in contact


----------



## miguksaram

puunui said:


> I thought it was like that now. At least it is for me in my small little world.


It seems the smaller the world the more it is that way.  When you think about the time he is referring too, the martial art world was very small and everyone had a good idea about one another.  This produced a more personal atmosphere than exists today.  Now things expanded and everyone and their dog has a black belt.  The personal feeling is not there as much and the results are many biased people who feel that they what they learn is the "true" art or the "real" art for the streets. They tend to look down at certain arts or pass judgment based on ignorance and speculation more than actual training.


----------



## Kinghercules

And Im suppose to have respect for these ppl and style?
No....no.....cant do it.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Kinghercules said:


> And Im suppose to have respect for these ppl and style?
> No....no.....cant do it.


Here's the article: http://newstimes.augusta.com/stories...o_628051.shtml

What is it about "these people and style" that you cannot respect?


----------



## Twin Fist

the part where they gave a BB to a 5 year old?


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Twin Fist said:


> the part where they gave a BB to a 5 year old?


People value a black belt quite highly, or at least most people do. They see it as something that takes a lot to achieve, both physically and menatally. For me personally, I find it hard to take the idea of a 5 year old black belt seriously. Obviously they have a different idea of what a black belt represents, but because Ive been brought up to value a black belt so highly, I have to agree with twin fist. I dont disrespect the child themself, its not their fault, they showed up to class, learnt a few forms and got given a black belt. Its the idea of a 5 year old black belt that makes little sense to me.


----------



## Cyriacus

Twin Fist said:


> the part where they gave a BB to a 5 year old?


Yep.
I wouldnt mind too much if it was a Junior Black Belt. That way, it just acknowledges that they can do the motions but lack the skill, and will develop it over the years. But an actual Black Belt?
Just no.


----------



## Gwai Lo Dan

MSUTKD said:


> I have always felt it is really the athlete, not the "group" that makes a difference.


I agree - take the smartest student from an average college, and the dumbest person from Harvard, and there will be no comparison as to who is the stronger student.


----------



## Gorilla

This topic is always the most controversial topic on this BBS.  I started a thread about youth black belts (poom).  It currently has over 13k in views people are stlill reading it.  My kids are still training they teach class now.  My daughter is doing private lessons for 10/13 who want to compete.  They are committed martial artist who see this as a life long passion. My kids GM currently a 9th degree bb KKW got his Poom in the early 1960's in Korea at the age of 8 from Y. Sup Lee.  Youth Poom belts have been given out for years.  5 year old is a big stretch but the ATA has it's own rules and it's own reason for doing it.

Btw way since I was blasted on this board in that youth BB Thread my kids have been earned a BB in Shotokan Karate under H. Allen. They are still fully active in TKD.  I will bet that people will still question them on this BBS.


----------



## SPX

I was about 8 months away from getting my black belt in the ATA when I was 11 years old.  If I had gotten it, would it have been legitimate?  I've actually wondered about that quite a bit.  I actually remember myself as being pretty good, at least as far as technique goes.  Adults would occasionally ask me to demonstrate some of my more flashy kicks and would sometimes even ask me to help them with their.  I don't think I could fight much, but that really is more the fault of the ATA than an 11 year old's ability to defend himself against his peers.  

So I do think that the idea of a 5 year old black belt is ridiculous.  But once you get get to around 11 or 12, as long as you have trained hard and long enough, I think it can be justified.


----------



## msmitht

Poom is not black belt in other countries. In the usa almost all poom wear a black belt. This is where, in my opinion, the mistake is made. All poom should wear the half red/black belt. This would set the kkw/wtf apart from the other schools and show that it is the training that is important, not the belt.
I don't think it will happen though.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Twin Fist said:


> the part where they gave a BB to a 5 year old?



Why?  Does it not match the uniform???


----------



## mastercole

msmitht said:


> Poom is not black belt in other countries. In the usa almost all poom wear a black belt. This is where, in my opinion, the mistake is made. All poom should wear the half red/black belt. This would set the kkw/wtf apart from the other schools and show that it is the training that is important, not the belt.
> I don't think it will happen though.



True. And Kukkiwon has had Poom for 37 years now. Poom was enacted February 14, 1975 in order for children to have additional incentive for rank achievement goals, but without ever having to designate a child as a Dan Holder (black belt).  Simply put, in Kukkiwon Taekwondo there are no official child "black belt" (Dan) holders, even though some schools may issue a solid black belt to a child, the certificate still states "Poom", not Dan.  Poom is a term used in ancient Korea to segregate court officials by a ranking.  If you ever visit Korea, as you enter Kyongbok Palace, you will see what looks to a Westerner like a narrow grave stone. They are lined in perfect order, and marked as 1st Poom, 2nd Poom, 3rd Poom, etc.  These stones are called Poomgyeseok.  Court officials would line up behind each stone during special ceremonies at Kyongbok Palace.

Taekkyon uses the term "Poom" to in place of "Geup" for their ranking system, a system which they recently adopted from Taekwondo.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

SPX said:


> I was about 8 months away from getting my black belt in the ATA when I was 11 years old.  If I had gotten it, would it have been legitimate?  I've actually wondered about that quite a bit.


If you didn't forge the certificate and if your instructor did not test you and file the paperwork until you had completed all of the technical elements that a candidate for first dan is supposed to meet within the ATA, then why would it not be legitimate?  



SPX said:


> I actually remember myself as being pretty good, at least as far as technique goes.  Adults would occasionally ask me to demonstrate some of my more flashy kicks and would sometimes even ask me to help them with their.  I don't think I could fight much, but that really is more the fault of the ATA than an 11 year old's ability to defend himself against his peers.



I attended a blackbelt testing at a school whose owner I know and I was asked to participate in the test as an opponent for the student who was testing.  The turn out was small and the kwanjang wanted at least four students for her to spar with and without me, there would only have been three.

She is 26 or so and weighs about 110 pounds and is very athletic, like gymnast athletic, all 110 pounds being bone, muscle and sinew.  Aside from the fact that we were of differing genders and that I am 100 pounds heavier, we were sparring under IHF rules.  

She did all of her technical testing very well and performed several difficult breaks.  When the sparring started, they put her in with me first.  I put her on the ground with each punch and could overbear her with relative ease.  She had never worked with anyone my size before.  It was what they call a squash match in pro wrestling.  

She did very well against her other partners, all of whom were closer to her size and weight, though all were male.  

So, because she couldn't beat or at least show well against a 212 pound guy, was her receiving a black belt not legitimate?



SPX said:


> So I do think that the idea of a 5 year old black belt is ridiculous.   But once you get get to around 11 or 12, as long as you have trained  hard and long enough, I think it can be justified.


The same people who complain about the five year old feel just as strongly about eleven and twelve year old black belts.  And given that in Korea, a black belt only takes a year to earn and two years on average in most US schools, how are you defining long enough?  Three years?  Four?  Six?

I notice that a lot of the objection that people have to children receiving their Chinese Checkers rank and accompanying black piece of cloth revolves around whether or not they can 'fight' an adult or beat up others of their own age range.

So, does mastering the material between white and black belt not count for anything?  And by 'master' I mean attain proficiency before anyone makes a speech about how nobody can ever truly _master_ anything.

Does putting in the time and effort not count?  What about personal development?

And I disagree with the notion that a child is incapable of understanding 'what a black belt _really_ means' or 'learn martial arts for real.'  

Isn't a first degree a beginning rank given to someone who has learned and become proficient in the basics?  Every five year old that I have met could comprehend that.

As far as learning the techniques, I have seen five year old children learn physical skills and perform them gracefully and artfully.  Look at some child gymnasts.  We're talking about kicking and punching.  Not very complex.

As to the notion that a two year black belt is not a real black belt that often accompanies these discussions, I disagree with that as well.  If it takes you longer than two years to learn how to punch and kick, then you probably are not practicing very much outside of class and probably not attending class more than once or twice a week.  If you are practicing diligently outside of class or showing up to class three or four times a week or more, then two years should be plenty.

What much of this discussion comes down to is that people feel threatened that a five year old was given the same Chinese checkers rank and black piece of cloth that they received because they have invested their ego into having that cloth.  The cloth represents their toughness and their manhood (I notice that the women don't tend to get as irate about this).  But that should not be.

To those of you who are hung up on belts, I'd like to remind you that martial training has nothing to do with belts.  Belts are for sports.  And last I checked, taekwondo is the national *sport *of Korea.  Because it is a sport, the five year old black belt is only paired with other black belts in his or her division.  Kind of like how a high school football team is not going to be magically pitted against the Baltimore Ravens, or any other pro team.  Or how a flag football team will not be pitted against a varsity high school team.

And before anyone makes another argument that opens with "but on the street" or some similar crap, save your bandwidth.  The dynamic of a violent encounter is radically different from the dynamic of a ring fight.  And even the most hard core MA training is most often insufficient (thought not necessarily useless) for most real world encounters.  Most often, the will to act decisively and intelligently is a much greater decider than one's level of training.

And just so people don't get me wrong, I am not defending the practice.  I simply understand the logic behind it and don't see why some of you get so upset about it.  

Say what you want about degrading or demeaning the arts, but personally, I think that it comes down to ego.  

If you truly do not want your art demeaned, then you should be promoting an end to using belts for the purpose of displaying rank and the use of the kyu/dan system.  That seems to be where the problem is centered.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

mastercole said:


> True. And Kukkiwon has had Poom for 37 years now. Poom was enacted February 14, 1975 in order for children to have additional incentive for rank achievement goals, but without ever having to designate a child as a Dan Holder (black belt).  Simply put, in Kukkiwon Taekwondo there are no official child "black belt" (Dan) holders, even though some schools may issue a solid black belt to a child, the certificate still states "Poom", not Dan.  Poom is a term used in ancient Korea to segregate court officials by a ranking.  If you ever visit Korea, as you enter Kyongbok Palace, you will see what looks to a Westerner like a narrow grave stone. They are lined in perfect order, and marked as 1st Poom, 2nd Poom, 3rd Poom, etc.  These stones are called Poomgyeseok.  Court officials would line up behind each stone during special ceremonies at Kyongbok Palace.
> 
> Taekkyon uses the term "Poom" to in place of "Geup" for their ranking system, a system which they recently adopted from Taekwondo.


I never knew the origin of the term.  Thank you.

However, the same people who complain about children getting 'black belts' also complain about pooms.  usually because their poom can be converted to a dan after they turn fifteen without some kind of accompanying macho hazing.  

Sometimes, I think that some (not all) are just looking to complain for the sake of complaining or simply do not believe that children should receive any recognition beyond geub grades regardless of age or effort.  I think that some others (not all) simply will spin anything that the big orgs do in a negative direction because they truly believe that if it comes out of an org, it must be bad.


----------



## Twin Fist

you know my feelings on this Daniel


----------



## SPX

Daniel Sullivan said:


> If you didn't forge the certificate and if your instructor did not test you and file the paperwork until you had completed all of the technical elements that a candidate for first dan is supposed to meet within the ATA, then why would it not be legitimate?



I dunno.  I think that what I mean is that each of us has our own notions of what a black belt should mean.  If I had gotten awarded a black belt, then from an organizational or official standpoint, yes, I would've been a black belt in ATA taekwondo.  However, would my abilities at that time have satisfied what are today my general ideas or requirements for what a "black belt" should be?  That is, would I have lived up to my own general concept of "black belt," regardless of the style?

Of course, this idea is subjective and will ultimately vary from person to person.




Daniel Sullivan said:


> So, because she couldn't beat or at least show well against a 212 pound guy, was her receiving a black belt not legitimate?



No, I personally don't think so at all.

Again, this is my own personal idea, but my self-defense expectation for a black belt is thus:  A black belt should be able to defend him or herself against another untrained person who does not have a significant size advantage.  

To expect more than that is, in my opinion, to be unreasonable and unfair.




Daniel Sullivan said:


> The same people who complain about the five year old feel just as strongly about eleven and twelve year old black belts.



I know.  But again, everyone's thoughts on the subject will vary.  A lot of people want to say you should have to be 16 or whatever.  I don't get where they're coming up with this number.  Personally, I think you should have to be physically and mentally capable of fulfilling the necessary requirements to achieve the rank.

I don't personally feel like a 5 year old's body is capable to doing the motions proficiently, nor is a 5 year old's mind capable of understanding the world enough to "get" certain self-defense or philosophical concepts that I believe go along with being a black belt.  12 year olds, however, are actually quite sophisticated . . . probably more so than most adults give them credit for.

But again, none of this is objective truth.  Just my take on things.


----------



## mastercole

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I never knew the origin of the term.  Thank you.
> 
> However, the same people who complain about children getting 'black belts' also complain about pooms.  usually because their poom can be converted to a dan after they turn fifteen without some kind of accompanying macho hazing.
> 
> Sometimes, I think that some (not all) are just looking to complain for the sake of complaining or simply do not believe that children should receive any recognition beyond geub grades regardless of age or effort.  I think that some others (not all) simply will spin anything that the big orgs do in a negative direction because they truly believe that if it comes out of an org, it must be bad.



Generally I find that most Americans, and especially most of those Americans who practice Asian martial arts, have no clue as to what a black belt actually means to the founders of their style.  Also, I notice that those who usually make a really big deal out of ranks, generally lack skill themselves.  I feel it is out of their insecurity, they are the quickest to point fingers and exclaim who is and who is not deserving.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Twin Fist said:


> you know my feelings on this Daniel


Yes, I do.  And you have articulated them well in this thread.  But you were not the person to whom I posed the question about respect and the article.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

SPX said:


> I dunno.  I think that what I mean is that each of us has our own notions of what a black belt should mean.  If I had gotten awarded a black belt, then from an organizational or official standpoint, yes, I would've been a black belt in ATA taekwondo.  However, would my abilities at that time have satisfied what are today my general ideas or requirements for what a "black belt" should be?  That is, would I have lived up to my own general concept of "black belt," regardless of the style?
> 
> Of course, this idea is subjective and will ultimately vary from person to person.


The question is not what each person's idea of a black belt is what it means within the art and within the organization.  The ATA promotes Songahm taekwondo.  What does a black belt mean in that style?

Songahm taekwondo uses belts for competition bracketing, along with age, gender, and weight.



SPX said:


> No, I personally don't think so at all.
> 
> Again, this is my own personal idea, but my self-defense expectation for a black belt is thus:  A black belt should be able to defend him or herself against another untrained person who does not have a significant size advantage.
> 
> To expect more than that is, in my opinion, to be unreasonable and unfair.


So you do not think her belt was legitimate or you do?  Your answer is not clear.  

As for the self defense element, the whole belt system was introduced for a combination of teachers aid and competition bracketing and the ranking system was specifically for competition bracketing.  Also, the kyu/dan system was lifted from Go, a Japanese game that is similar to Reversi or Chinese checkers.  If self defense was what it was to correspond to, methinks Kano would have picked something else.  

Funakoshi, as I understand, introduced the kyu/dan system in order to help get Shotokan into the school system.  Doesn't exactly scream self defense.



SPX said:


> I know.  But again, everyone's thoughts on the subject will vary.  A lot of people want to say you should have to be 16 or whatever.  I don't get where they're coming up with this number.  Personally, I think you should have to be physically and mentally capable of fulfilling the necessary requirements to achieve the rank.
> 
> I don't personally feel like a 5 year old's body is capable to doing the motions proficiently, nor is a 5 year old's mind capable of understanding the world enough to "get" certain self-defense or philosophical concepts that I believe go along with being a black belt.  12 year olds, however, are actually quite sophisticated . . . probably more so than most adults give them credit for.
> 
> But again, none of this is objective truth.  Just my take on things.


Well, here is how proficient a five year old can be: 


















So after watching those videos, how can you say that a five year old would be incapable of "doing the motions proficiently?"  And the kids in those videos clearly know how to practice.  Particularly the last one.

Now, I think that these kids are older than five, but they don't look any older than ten.





Remember, the ATA uses belts for competition bracketing, along with age, gender, and weight.  So long as the proficiency in technique is there and the kids are not just being promoted so that the school can make a buck, its okay with me.  Not my cup of coffee, mind you, but its okay with me.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

I suppose where it seems to break down for most is that in almost any other art, and in many forms of tkd, the idea of a black belt seems to be held in higher esteem than certian brands of tkd. The average guy on the street doesnt know this and just assumes tkd hands out black belts like candy. The idea of getting a black belt in one year in hapkido, aikido, many forms of tkd, shotokan, kyokushin, bjj, judo etc etc is just unheard of, so I can understand why some people just "dont get it" when they hear of child black belts. So basically 'easy' black belts are very rare except in a couple of forms of tkd, so you can see where the misunderstandings come from. And whether we like it or not, most people out there (both martial artists and non martial artisits) see a black belt as a very high level of proficiency, so hearing about "one year black belts" and "5 year old black belts" is always going to raise eyebrows. I also blame the media for these "child black belt" stories, because rarely, if ever, do they mention it is a poom belt not a real black belt, and that does nothing for tkd's reputation as a belt factory. I saw a show on tv the other day where they were discussing fighting techniques and the guy said "if you know a black belt in your social group, ask for advice on these things. Not a tkd black belt, but a real black belt, they can be quite helpful, they are a wealth of knowledge ". I shuddered, but then this is what 5 year old black belts do to tkd's reputation.


----------



## SPX

Daniel Sullivan said:


> The question is not what each person's idea of a black belt is what it means within the art and within the organization.  The ATA promotes Songahm taekwondo.  What does a black belt mean in that style?
> 
> Songahm taekwondo uses belts for competition bracketing, along with age, gender, and weight.



Well it's like I said, yes, according to the requirements of that organization, yes, my black belt would've been legitimate.  But everyone has their own idea of what the general concept of "black belt" should reflect.  Your concept seems to be . . . whatever the organization says it is.  But there are clearly posters on here who feel that, regardless of style, regardless of organization, there are essential qualities which should be present when thinking of "a black belt."




Daniel Sullivan said:


> So you do not think her belt was legitimate or you do?  Your answer is not clear.



You asked if I thought it was "not legitimate."  I said don't think so at all, that is I do not think it is "not legitimate," meaning that I think it IS legitimate.  




Daniel Sullivan said:


> As for the self defense element, the whole belt system was introduced for a combination of teachers aid and competition bracketing and the ranking system was specifically for competition bracketing.  Also, the kyu/dan system was lifted from Go, a Japanese game that is similar to Reversi or Chinese checkers.  If self defense was what it was to correspond to, methinks Kano would have picked something else.
> 
> Funakoshi, as I understand, introduced the kyu/dan system in order to help get Shotokan into the school system.  Doesn't exactly scream self defense.



Regardless of their intention, it's an inescapable fact that those guys are gone.  Yes, their systems are still being taught, but those systems have continued to evolve, and I would argue that ideas about the belt system have as well.




Daniel Sullivan said:


> Well, here is how proficient a five year old can be:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So after watching those videos, how can you say that a five year old would be incapable of "doing the motions proficiently?"  And the kids in those videos clearly know how to practice.  Particularly the last one.



I like that you posted 3 gymnastics videos and a dance vid to prove your point about martial arts.  That notwithstanding, those kids are impressive.  I'll grant you that the kids in the last vid are freaks of nature.  But I can at least say that all the 5 year olds I've personally seen performing patterns do so with a certain herky jerky, almost robot like kind of movement that denies them an ability to perform the task with what I would call "acceptable technique." 




Daniel Sullivan said:


> Now, I think that these kids are older than five, but they don't look any older than ten.



I would say they're around 12, and they are right about the age that I would say it's acceptable for them to earn a black belt because they have the physical and mental maturity to do so.


----------



## SPX

ralphmcpherson said:


> And whether we like it or not, most people out there (both martial artists and non martial artisits) see a black belt as a very high level of proficiency, so hearing about "one year black belts" and "5 year old black belts" is always going to raise eyebrows.



Just as an aside, I believe that there are official programs available to get a black belt in a year in both aikido and judo, but you basically have to go to Japan, live at the Kodokan (or the aikido equivalent) like a monk, and train 8 hours a day to do so.  

So I guess really it's a matter of hours invested, not days between gradings.  If you see what I mean.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

This is where certain types of tkd does themself no favours I feel. Its all good and well to say "oh, yeah but in OUR form of tkd a black belt means something different, so its ok to hand them out a bit easier", but if you are the only martial art to have this theory it quite easily gets misunderstood in the wider community. It would be like opening a burger place and selling burgers thats just the bread with nothing else and then when people say "gee you make a crap hamburger, its just two bits of bread" replying with "oh no, at THIS burger place we believe a burger is just two slices of bread". Sure, they can say that, but its widely aknowledged that a hamburger isnt just two slices of bread. Just as these places can say that its fine to give out a black belt in one year and justify it with the old adage that they believe a black belt means something different, but very few people out there accept that a black belt is attainable in one year (outside of a couple of forms of tkd).


----------



## ralphmcpherson

SPX said:


> Just as an aside, I believe that there are official programs available to get a black belt in a year in both aikido and judo, but you basically have to go to Japan, live at the Kodokan (or the aikido equivalent) like a monk, and train 8 hours a day to do so.
> 
> So I guess really it's a matter of hours invested, not days between gradings.  If you see what I mean.


I have no doubt that all martial arts have the "dodgy joe's kung fu academy" that hands out black belts in a year, but they are few and far between and are not huge organisations.


----------



## SPX

ralphmcpherson said:


> I have no doubt that all martial arts have the "dodgy joe's kung fu academy" that hands out black belts in a year, but they are few and far between and are not huge organisations.



I'm referring to the real deal, though.  The Kodokan, if you're not familiar with judo, is basically judo HQ in Japan.

As for the Aikido program, I'm no expert but it's mentioned in this vid:


----------



## hoshindo

Now this is my take on all of this.......each instructor to their own and all sees in a different view.
 NOW it sounds like most of you hold the BELT in a very high place. If you have these students training with you lets say 5 years ( a 10yo  a 20yo  a 40yo  a 55yo ) and in 5 years they test for the BLACK BELT    is your expectations the same across the board?   Do you expect to 55yo to do the same as the 20yo?  Do you expect the 10yo to do the same as the 40yo?  If you make expectations because of the age differences then maybe you are doing the same as instructors giving a BELT at a young age.


 Now if a black belt is to know the basics really good and remember we tell the students that your journey starts at the black belt level.
 Lets say I teach the basic kicks (only 6 ) front / side / back / roundhouse / inside & outside crescents.
 And the 8 to 10 basic hand strikes, leaving all of the spinning and jumping techniques to be at black belt level and  the student shows me that they know all of the basic techniques then why not promote that student to black belt  at whatever age that student is.


 Now another ?.    Is one of your black belt students lost in an altercation would you strip that student of their belt?  Because is sounds like most of you think that a 5 year old BB has to be able to handle themselves against an adult.
 If that 5yo  or that 20yo quits  are they still a BB 15 or 20 years later?   Just a few things on my mind.

Jim


----------



## Cyriacus

hoshindo said:


> Now this is my take on all of this.......each instructor to their own and all sees in a different view.
> NOW it sounds like most of you hold the BELT in a very high place.
> 
> *Belts are great for keeping your Uniform Tidy. It also signifies Experience.*
> 
> If you have these students training with you lets say 5 years ( a 10yo  a 20yo  a 40yo  a 55yo ) and in 5 years they test for the BLACK BELT    is your expectations the same across the board?
> 
> *Unless the Practitioner is Physically Incapacitated, Yes.*
> 
> Do you expect to 55yo to do the same as the 20yo?  Do you expect the 10yo to do the same as the 40yo?
> 
> *No. Which is why I wouldnt give the 10yo a BB. Or the 55yo if He couldnt cut it. He could however get a Brown Belt with a Black Tip.*
> 
> If you make expectations because of the age differences then maybe you are doing the same as instructors giving a BELT at a young age.
> 
> *No - Im setting Standards.*
> 
> Now if a black belt is to know the basics really good and remember we tell the students that your journey starts at the black belt level.
> 
> *The Black Belt signifies the ascertainment of the Foundation. The White Belt is the start of the Journey. But to each their own.*
> 
> Lets say I teach the basic kicks (only 6 ) front / side / back / roundhouse / inside & outside crescents.
> And the 8 to 10 basic hand strikes, leaving all of the spinning and jumping techniques to be at black belt level and  the student shows me that they know all of the basic techniques then why not promote that student to black belt  at whatever age that student is.
> 
> *Because of their ability to APPLY them. Skill is not just skill at doing movements. Its in USING them.*
> 
> Now another ?.    Is one of your black belt students lost in an altercation would you strip that student of their belt?
> 
> *How is that relevant?*
> 
> Because is sounds like most of you think that a 5 year old BB has to be able to handle themselves against an adult.
> 
> *No, they need to be able to fully apply what theyve been taught. Not just be technically correct whilst quoting whats been told to them.
> 
> * If that 5yo  or that 20yo quits  are they still a BB 15 or 20 years later?
> 
> *What rank where they before they quit?*
> 
> Just a few things on my mind.
> 
> Jim



Just My Contribution.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

hoshindo said:


> Now this is my take on all of this.......each instructor to their own and all sees in a different view.
> NOW it sounds like most of you hold the BELT in a very high place. If you have these students training with you lets say 5 years ( a 10yo  a 20yo  a 40yo  a 55yo ) and in 5 years they test for the BLACK BELT    is your expectations the same across the board?   Do you expect to 55yo to do the same as the 20yo?  Do you expect the 10yo to do the same as the 40yo?  If you make expectations because of the age differences then maybe you are doing the same as instructors giving a BELT at a young age.
> 
> 
> Now if a black belt is to know the basics really good and remember we tell the students that your journey starts at the black belt level.
> Lets say I teach the basic kicks (only 6 ) front / side / back / roundhouse / inside & outside crescents.
> And the 8 to 10 basic hand strikes, leaving all of the spinning and jumping techniques to be at black belt level and  the student shows me that they know all of the basic techniques then why not promote that student to black belt  at whatever age that student is.
> 
> 
> Now another ?.    Is one of your black belt students lost in an altercation would you strip that student of their belt?  Because is sounds like most of you think that a 5 year old BB has to be able to handle themselves against an adult.
> If that 5yo  or that 20yo quits  are they still a BB 15 or 20 years later?   Just a few things on my mind.
> 
> Jim


I think time is of bigger significance than age. I have not seen a student yet who was able to even get close to what I consider a black belt level in under 5 years of training including training outside of class. I have also yet to see a child under the age of 7 or 8 who can even begin to 'understand' what they are learning, not just memorising a series of moves. So my personal opinion is that if a child started tkd aged 8 and trained hard for 5 years then there is a possibility they could be profficicient to a standard that I consider a black belt by maybe 13 years old if they are lucky.


----------



## andyjeffries

mastercole said:


> Generally I find that most Americans, and especially most of those Americans who practice Asian martial arts, have no clue as to what a black belt actually means to the founders of their style.



Master Cole, I'd be interested in hearing in your words what you feel a black belt means to the founders of Taekwondo.  I know you've talked with many of the founders and I know you'd be paraphrasing/going from memory, but I'm interested in what they've had to say on the topic.

Everyone has an idea of what a black belt means, I know I do.  I feel that a black belt should be achievable by everyone.  It may take some longer than others, some may be better than others, but it's a step on the journey that shows you are capable of learning.  I wrote out a while ago my expectations for each grade and for 1st Poom/Dan I wrote:

_A 1st Poom/Dan should be confident in being able to teach small groups of students (e.g. up to 4 people) basic techniques and early patterns. Their movements should be mainly correct. If they have small errors they should be able to be told them and correct them without needing constant reminding - they should be self-motivated._

This sums up my feelings on that rank.

But, as I said, I'd be interested in hearing what the founders think of it.  I'd imagine they aren't thinking about 1st Dans being able to teach yet, but for me that's a key concept of being able to do something (if you can't explain it to someone else, you don't really know it) and I want to train my students not just to be fighters or martial artists, but future teachers of others.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

andyjeffries said:


> Master Cole, I'd be interested in hearing in your words what you feel a black belt means to the founders of Taekwondo.  I know you've talked with many of the founders and I know you'd be paraphrasing/going from memory, but I'm interested in what they've had to say on the topic.
> 
> Everyone has an idea of what a black belt means, I know I do.  I feel that a black belt should be achievable by everyone.  It may take some longer than others, some may be better than others, but it's a step on the journey that shows you are capable of learning.  I wrote out a while ago my expectations for each grade and for 1st Poom/Dan I wrote:
> 
> _A 1st Poom/Dan should be confident in being able to teach small groups of students (e.g. up to 4 people) basic techniques and early patterns. Their movements should be mainly correct. If they have small errors they should be able to be told them and correct them without needing constant reminding - they should be self-motivated._
> 
> This sums up my feelings on that rank.
> 
> But, as I said, I'd be interested in hearing what the founders think of it.  I'd imagine they aren't thinking about 1st Dans being able to teach yet, but for me that's a key concept of being able to do something (if you can't explain it to someone else, you don't really know it) and I want to train my students not just to be fighters or martial artists, but future teachers of others.


I have to agree with where you said "a black belt should be achievable to everyone". The standards and requirements should be things anybody can achieve with hard work and persistence (maybe not at 5 years old though). I heard of a club once that had a black belt grading requiremnet of doing a 540 kick. I thought that was a bit over the top, I think there are certain things that arent achievable by everyone and they should not be part of grading requirements etc.


----------



## dancingalone

SPX said:


> Just as an aside, I believe that there are official programs available to get a black belt in a year in both aikido and judo, but you basically have to go to Japan, live at the Kodokan (or the aikido equivalent) like a monk, and train 8 hours a day to do so.
> 
> So I guess really it's a matter of hours invested, not days between gradings.  If you see what I mean.



Aikido has strict practice requirements before a student can become eligible to test for a higher rank.  These are the US Aikido Federation guidelines - the USAF is affiliated with the Aikikai Hombu in Japan, and I imagine the requirements are the same there, as it is the world HQ that issues ranks ultimately based on the recommendation of approved instructors.

6th kyu      20 days of practice
5th Kyu    40 days of practice
4th Kyu    80 days of practice after obtaining 5th Kyu
3rd Kyu    100 days of practice after obtaining 4th Kyu
2nd Kyu    200 days of practice after obtaining 3rd Kyu
1st Kyu    300 days of practice after obtaining 2nd Kyu
1st Dan    300 days of practice after obtaining 1st Kyu


These are actual days of practice - attendance is recorded.  Based on USAF requirements *you could not achieve shodan within a year* or even 3 years.  Furthermore, *there is a minimum age of 18 *to hold the rank of shodan.  Most shodans in my experience generally take 5 -7 years to achieve it the distinction. The culture within aikido does not further the idea that achieving rank quickly is a good thing.  Ready is ready.  If that is quickly, then great.  If not, then in due time.  Without addressing the idea of an intensive live-in course that SPX brought up, we can look at the 'how long to BB' threads commonly on Aikiweb and other aikido discussion forums - they uniformly indicate even across styles, that an aikido BB is an achievement requiring considerable time.

Now how does this apply to the subject of child black belts?  Well, since the argument that dan ranks are linked to competition bracketing persists to be given, I put forward the case that aikido with arguably even closer roots to jujutsu and thus judo than TKD, has similarly added a dan ranking system.  Yet in mainline aikido there is no concept of 'competition bracketing'.  Instead the belts are used to indicate proficiency and thus there are firm practice time requirements along with a minimum age.  IMO this is a good thing and it is a clear example of where the meaning of dan ranks has moved way past competitive purposes.

*I believe reducing the position of those who disagree with child black belts as being jealous, egotistical, or unskilled frankly does a disservice to TKD and martial arts in general.*  There's nothing wrong with higher standards - not impossible ones mind you.


----------



## miguksaram

I know this is way out there, but how many of you get pissy about the sales group Six Sigma that gives out black belt certificates for their program?  If you do, why?  If not, why?


----------



## dancingalone

miguksaram said:


> I know this is way out there, but how many of you get pissy about the sales group Six Sigma that gives out black belt certificates for their program?  If you do, why?  If not, why?



I roll my eyes at it.  Still, I don't know any 5 year olds who are getting Six Sigma certified.


----------



## miguksaram

dancingalone said:


> I roll my eyes at it.  Still, I don't know any 5 year olds who are getting Six Sigma certified.


But why do you roll your eyes at it?   (Just humor me...haven't had my coffee yet)


----------



## dancingalone

miguksaram said:


> But why do you roll your eyes at it?   (Just humor me...haven't had my coffee yet)



Because you can take a certification course in something like a week and emerge as a Six Sigma BB or at least that used to be the case in the nineties.  I worked in consulting and this cert was just another set of initials you could tack onto your resume/CV to make yourself and your firm look impressive to clients.  I am sure the knowledge in quality management the program is supposed to impart is a great thing - if you actually learn the material.


----------



## Cyriacus

dancingalone said:


> Because you can take a certification course in something like a week and emerge as a Six Sigma BB or at least that used to be the case in the nineties.  I worked in consulting and this cert was just another set of initials you could tack onto your resume/CV to make yourself and your firm look impressive to clients.  I am sure the knowledge in quality management the program is supposed to impart is a great thing - if you actually learn the material.


Quick Question. I Googled Six Sigma. Is it what I think it is? $550 for a Black Belt?


----------



## dancingalone

By the way, I seem to be the only person on this thread that actually has CURRENT ATA experience:  my niece and nephew are ATA black belts (yes, they are minors) and I regularly work with them so I know their curriculum quite well and I've been known to take them to a tournament or two when my sister can't.  And, um, yes within the ATA there is at the very least a concept of performance proficiency as well associated with the grades.  It is not entirely about sports pairing.  In fact, ATA instructors talk extensively about what each belt color is supposed to mean and they freely use the word 'mastery' even at the brown belt level.


Brown Belt
"THE TREE IS TAKING ROOT."  At this point, the student has *mastered *the basics and developed deep roots in Taekwondo.

Interesting word to use there.  MASTERED.  As in 'Acquire complete knowledge or skill in (an accomplishment, technique, or art).'

So any of you that want to minimize the ATA and their standards, well OFFICIALLY they're supposed to be high, regardless of the age of the student.  If there are individual schools and instructors, even a lot of them, who allow something less in their students, well that's their problem.  And the same goes for non-ATA people too.


----------



## dancingalone

Cyriacus said:


> Quick Question. I Googled Six Sigma. Is it what I think it is? $550 for a Black Belt?



I've no idea what you think what it is... It's essentially a quality management certification.  It started in the manufacturing sector with research done by some people at Motorola.  It's grown considerably since its inception and now is used in even customer service organizations.

As for cost, I'm sure it's high enough.  Most people who get it are sponsored by their employer, generally large companies, so the amount isn't a factor normally.


----------



## Cyriacus

dancingalone said:


> I've no idea what you think what it is... It's essentially a quality management certification.  It started in the manufacturing sector with research done by some people at Motorola.  It's grown considerably since its inception and now is used in even customer service organizations.
> 
> As for cost, I'm sure it's high enough.  Most people who get it are sponsored by their employer, generally large companies, so the amount isn't a factor normally.


Thats just it - Im unsure why a Quality Management place has Belts.


----------



## dancingalone

Cyriacus said:


> Thats just it - Im unsure why a Quality Management place has Belts.



Marketing.  The funny thing is that a Six Sigma black belt is supposed to be a *technical expert* in their research and implementation process.  I suspect the guy who came up with the lingo for Six Sigma didn't have competitive bracketing in his head when he decided to use black belt to designate the expert grade.


----------



## Twin Fist

i refuse to take an organization seriously that added CAMOFLAUGE as a belt color.

case closed.

oh, and in case i need to say it again?

anything less than a 3 yr BB (and they better be fan-friggin-tastic to make it in 3 years) is crap

any younger than 10 is crap, even for a poom or jr black

any younger than 16 for a DAN rank is

say it with me

CRAP


----------



## andyjeffries

ralphmcpherson said:


> I have to agree with where you said "a black belt should be achievable to everyone". The standards and requirements should be things anybody can achieve with hard work and persistence (maybe not at 5 years old though).



I agree with you on both points.  I'm not saying 1st Dan/Poom should be easy, it should take considerable effort - but that's relative effort to that person, I'm not a fan of crazy requirements to prove you're worth a belt rank that are only achievable by the elite.  I'm not saying there aren't exceptional children out there at this age and at that point I may re-consider whether I feel it's too young, but having just had two kids go through that age (my youngest is 6, so not that much older) and having a few students at 6, I can't imagine any of them being disciplined enough to be a poom/dan holder.

That discipline level is more important for me than the understanding of philosophy or ability to defend oneself against an attacker for a child, and I haven't seen any 5-6 year olds that have what it takes.


----------



## miguksaram

My point is this...none of us are calling them frauds or a crappy company because they give out black belts (albeit black belt certification) to people who are not martial artists.   We all have our definition of what a black belt is or should be.  My definition works for me and my students.  Example:  We have students who are under 16 who will wear a solid black belt for sport purposes....guess what, some of them are only green and purple belts in the school.  They just really excel in the sport aspect.  We have Jr. Black Belts that wear a solid black belt in tournaments, but will wear a black with white stripe in the school signifying that they are Jr.  What the ATA does has nothing to do with me.  Just like what Six Sigma does has nothing to do with me.  So why stress it?

As for the argument, that makes us all look bad, I have to tell you that hearing about an instructor manhandling his/her students makes us all look bad.  This just makes that school look quirky.  Outside of that news article would any of you have even known that school existed?  Personally there are not enough ATA school around my area to keep stressed out that they belt milling 5 year olds.  I'm more worried about TUF making us look like a bunch of drunken buffoons waiting to beat the crap out of one another (Please note that while I worry about the image it creates, I do find the show entertaining....I know...I'm a hypocrite).


----------



## Cyriacus

Twin Fist said:


> i refuse to take an organization seriously that added CAMOFLAUGE as a belt color.
> 
> case closed.
> 
> oh, and in case i need to say it again?
> 
> anything less than a 3 yr BB (and they better be fan-friggin-tastic to make it in 3 years) is crap
> 
> any younger than 10 is crap, even for a poom or jr black
> 
> any younger than 16 for a DAN rank is
> 
> say it with me
> 
> CRAP



...Crap?


----------



## dancingalone

miguksaram said:


> My point is this...none of us are calling them frauds or a crappy company because they give out black belts (albeit black belt certification) to people who are not martial artists.



Because the black belt is tongue-in-cheek.  It is clear Six Sigma is not certifying the physical performance of their people in martial arts.  Instead, they use black belt merely as a label for expert which is reasonable enough in my view if their verification and award process was/is a credible one.



miguksaram said:


> We all have our definition of what a black belt is or should be.  My definition works for me and my students.  Example:  We have students who are under 16 who will wear a solid black belt for sport purposes....guess what, some of them are only green and purple belts in the school.  They just really excel in the sport aspect.  We have Jr. Black Belts that wear a solid black belt in tournaments, but will wear a black with white stripe in the school signifying that they are Jr.  What the ATA does has nothing to do with me.  Just like what Six Sigma does has nothing to do with me.  So why stress it?
> 
> As for the argument, that makes us all look bad, I have to tell you that hearing about an instructor manhandling his/her students makes us all look bad.  This just makes that school look quirky.  Outside of that news article would any of you have even known that school existed?  Personally there are not enough ATA school around my area to keep stressed out that they belt milling 5 year olds.  I'm more worried about TUF making us look like a bunch of drunken buffoons waiting to beat the crap out of one another (Please note that while I worry about the image it creates, I do find the show entertaining....I know...I'm a hypocrite).



I've owned a commercial dojang for almost 4 months now.  I can tell everyone that one of the most common questions I answer for prospects and/or their parents is 'How long does it take to get a black belt'.  To a lesser extent, a few of them have had previous experience elsewhere and they can be a little surprised when I tell them my best guesstimate is that training 2-3 times a week for an hour at a time, it might take 3+ years to attain sufficient physical competence to be awarded a chodan (and this is hardly a grueling gauntlet of time).

So clearly lesser standards elsewhere can 'affect' me.  My task is to turn the way I do things into an asset, rather than letting it be a possible liability, and that is as things should be.

I think most people don't really care too much whether it is easy or hard to get a black belt.  For them the training experience is most important, and they can receive a great value for their money even if the standards are more rigorous and the promotion pace slower.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

SPX said:


> You asked if I thought it was "not legitimate." I said don't think so at all, that is I do not think it is "not legitimate," meaning that I think it IS legitimate.



Thank you for clarifying that.



SPX said:


> Regardless of their intention, it's an inescapable fact that those guys are gone. Yes, their systems are still being taught, but those systems have continued to evolve, and I would argue that ideas about the belt system have as well.


I would argue that it hasn't evolved in the countries where the art originated but that the idea of the black belt was taken and changed into 'martial arts master' by returning US servicemen who brought the art back here.  That doesn't mean that the idea has evolved; simply that it was never properly communicated in the first place.




SPX said:


> I like that you posted 3 gymnastics videos and a dance vid to prove your point about martial arts. That notwithstanding, those kids are impressive. I'll grant you that the kids in the last vid are freaks of nature. But I can at least say that all the 5 year olds I've personally seen performing patterns do so with a certain herky jerky, almost robot like kind of movement that denies them an ability to perform the task with what I would call "acceptable technique."



I didn't post them to prove a point about martial arts.  I posted them as a response to what you said a five year old body was incapable of.  The movements of taekwondo and most martial arts simply are not that complex.  I do believe that kids under the age of fifteen (general number, not carved in stone) should not be subjected to joint locks due to greater potential for injury, but that has nothing to do with the ability of the child.

I didn't immediately see any videos of actual five year old black belts (maybe they're out there, but I'm not inclined to take the time to dig them up) , but the videos that I posted demonstrate that a five year old is capable of attaining proficiency in a physical skill that requires substantial amounts of practice.

Again, while I am not crazy about the practice, I think the reasons that most of the detractors list are lacking if looked at critically.  

My main issue with the practice has nothing to do with the age of the child but more to do with the fact that the schools that do it all seem to be overpriced McDojos and they are using the belts to bilk parents out of more cash.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I would argue that it hasn't evolved in the countries where the art originated but that the idea of the black belt was taken and changed into 'martial arts master' by returning US servicemen who brought the art back here.  That doesn't mean that the idea has evolved; simply that it was never properly communicated in the first place.



Check out the leading karate organizations and ryu in Okinawa and Japan.  They've evolved similarly or they have been influenced by the Western conception of what a black belt means.  Last time I looked into this because of a similar thread on MT, I verified the JKA (leading Shotokan org) requires a 3 year minimum time before testing for shodan http://www.jka.or.jp/english/faq/faq_main.html#12.  It is not said outright, but there is a clear implication of competence inherent within the rank.  Similarly, the Junkokan, a leading Goju-ryu school on Okinawa, said 5 years was normal to achieve a shodan with them (sorry no link as this was a conversation I had with a member).  As with anything, there are exceptions, but there are the normal guidelines. 

How this pertains to TKD and the apparent normal 1 year term in Korea, I don't know.  But I think it would be wrong to think that the original sources are NOT affected by what happens elsewhere.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Twin Fist said:


> i refuse to take an organization seriously that added CAMOFLAUGE as a belt color.
> 
> case closed.
> 
> oh, and in case i need to say it again?
> 
> anything less than a 3 yr BB (and they better be fan-friggin-tastic to make it in 3 years) is crap
> 
> any younger than 10 is crap, even for a poom or jr black
> 
> any younger than 16 for a DAN rank is
> 
> say it with me
> 
> CRAP


Guess old Chuck Norris _really_ must be crap! He started in 1958 and was back in the US opening a chain of dojos in 1962. Sounds like less than two years to black belt to me (I'm pretty sure that he got his in about a year). And to open a dojo in only four years.... when everyone knows that you have to be at least fourth dan to open a dojo... and that takes at least another four years.... Chuck must have been totally unqualified!!

If Chuck was crap in Way of the Dragon, then man, crap must be the new superb. I suspect that many of the MA fathers that we revere took less time than you and others claim in needed to be a "real" black belt. 

Whenever things like that are mentioned, the response is always, "but that was Chuck Norris..." as if he's the exception to the rule. Actually, he isn't the exception to the rule; he simply was exception*al*. Not everyone is exceptional. Not every first string college quarterback is Tim Tebow. 

You do understand that karate and judo use the belt system for competition bracketing and because it made it more marketable to the Japanese school system don't you?

You also understand that the whole system of rank is lifted from a Japanese game of Reversi (popularly known as Othelo)?

The whole thing was grafted onto arts that were modern sport oriented arts that focused on personal development and competition. A black belt has absolutely zero correspondence to self defense. That is a marketing gimick made up to promote it in the US where sports like TKD, Karate, Judo, and Kendo had no chance to compete with boxing, wrestling, football, or baseball for popularity. 

When the make up of US dojo student bodies were ex-military and other tough-guy adult males, the black belts were going to *all* be tougher guy adult males. I doubt that the school age children in Japan who were learning karate and getting black belts looked as tough as the US black belts... because the US black belts were all adult males who were inclined towards fighting before they ever stepped into the dojo.

The make up of students is much more diverse now, and belt factory schools aside, the average black belt will reflect that. The fact is that in the countries where these arts originate, getting to black belt is between a year and two years and has been since the arts were founded should tell you that you need to realign your perception of what a black belt is. 

Or simply say that it takes that three to four years at your school and that other schools differ... instead of simply writing them all off as crap.

I do however agree with you regarding the camo belt.  It is just plain stupid.  So is the whole recommended and decided element of ATA grading, which as I understand it (no ATA member has ever disputed this) turn eight geub tests between ninth and first dan into sixteen geub tests, each of which with an accompanying fee.  Adding a camo belt seems like just adding belts for the sake of adding belts so that more money can be charged...

...which is really my big criticism of the ATA.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> Check out the leading karate organizations and ryu in Okinawa and Japan. They've evolved similarly or they have been influenced by the Western conception of what a black belt means. Last time I looked into this because of a similar thread on MT, I verified the JKA (leading Shotokan org) requires a 3 year minimum time before testing for shodan http://www.jka.or.jp/english/faq/faq_main.html#12. It is not said outright, but there is a clear implication of competence inherent within the rank. Similarly, the Junkokan, a leading Goju-ryu school on Okinawa, said 5 years was normal to achieve a shodan with them (sorry no link as this was a conversation I had with a member). As with anything, there are exceptions, but there are the normal guidelines.
> 
> How this pertains to TKD and the apparent normal 1 year term in Korea, I don't know. But I think it would be wrong to think that the original sources are NOT affected by what happens elsewhere.


Well, apparently in the US, the black belt is evolving into a two year affair.  The fact that two years seems to be the norm for the industry means that, by your logic, those of you who expect longer periods of time should evolve to the new standard as well.

I don't really care how long other schools take to promote a student to first dan; each school has its own training methods and their own mix of material.  But to impose that upon other schools and then judge them based upon how your school (not your's specifically, but the general your) does things is inappropriate.


----------



## Gemini

Cyriacus said:


> Quick Question. I Googled Six Sigma. Is it what I think it is? $550 for a Black Belt?


How significant a Six Sigma certification is depends on where you received it from and what type it is. If you received a certification based on manufacturing from Motorola (who developed the process) or one of the companies that incorporated the process directly from them, it will be considered highly prized as the requirements needed do achieve that are stout to say the least. Many schools are now offering certification, but none will carry that kind of weight and more emphasis will be put on historical success. The "Black Belts" I've worked with have been quite capable, but I'm not a huge fan of the Six Sigma process. I don't feel in my industry it applies well.

Back to the relevance to the post by miguksaram _"__how many of you get pissy about the sales group Six Sigma that gives out black belt certificates for their program"_. I think it's interesting, but I know regarding the ones I work with that they think more of mine than I think of theirs.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Well, apparently in the US, the black belt is evolving into a two year affair.



Within TKD, that might be true.  Not so much other arts like karate, aikido, BJJ, judo (heh), or kenpo.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> The fact that two years seems to be the norm for the industry means that, by your logic, those of you who expect longer periods of time should evolve to the new standard as well.



I don't know that I concede 2 years is a norm [yet] in the United States.  And it's not too late at all to fight the trend if indeed it is the trend to shorten the length of time to BB in TKD to 2 years or less.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> I don't really care how long other schools take to promote a student to first dan; each school has its own training methods and their own mix of material.  But to impose that upon other schools and then judge them based upon how your school (not your's specifically, but the general your) does things is inappropriate.



It is very appropriate to set a qualitative value on varying amounts of training content, duration, and intensity in order to explain the differences between them.  A 6 course certificate in accounting courses does not equal a 2 year junior college degree in business and that in turn is not a 4 year BBA in accounting.


----------



## Twin Fist

pretty sure Chuck Norris would qualify under the "fan-friggin-tastic" clause i sighted earlier Daniel

but how many people are Chuck Norris?

and who says you have to be a 4th to open a school? i did it as a 2nd. My instructors did it as 1st, but back then, there were no morons giving BB's to 5 year olds either,

the belt meant more back then

so, to be clear

it only takes a year -two years in KOREA, in japan it is a different story. They still have standards.

the KKW just said that they are cool with 1 year bb's  right?

so either:
1- they dont care how well you know it

or

2- what they consider BB material isnt very much or very complicated.



i





Daniel Sullivan said:


> Guess old Chuck Norris _really_ must be crap! He started in 1958 and was back in the US opening a chain of dojos in 1962. Sounds like less than two years to black belt to me (I'm pretty sure that he got his in about a year).  And to open a dojo in only four years.... when everyone knows that you have to be at least fourth dan to open a dojo... and that takes at least another four years.... Chuck must have been totally unqualified!!
> 
> If Chuck was crap in Way of the Dragon, then man, crap must be the new superb. I suspect that many of the MA fathers that we revere took less time than you and others claim in needed to be a "real" black belt.
> 
> Whenever things like that are mentioned, the response is always, "but that was Chuck Norris..." as if he's the exception to the rule. Actually, he isn't the exception to the rule; he simply was exception*al*. Not everyone is exceptional. Not every first string college quarterback is Tim Tebow.
> 
> You do understand that karate and judo use the belt system for competition bracketing and because it made it more marketable to the Japanese school system don't you?
> 
> You also understand that the whole system of rank is lifted from a Japanese game of Reversi (popularly known as Othelo)?
> 
> The whole thing was grafted onto arts that were modern sport oriented arts that focused on personal development and competition. A black belt has absolutely zero correspondence to self defense. That is a marketing gimick made up to promote it in the US where sports like TKD, Karate, Judo, and Kendo had no chance to compete with boxing, wrestling, football, or baseball for popularity.
> 
> When the make up of US dojo student bodies were ex-military and other tough-guy adult males, the black belts were going to *all* be tougher guy adult males. I doubt that the school age children in Japan who were learning karate and getting black belts looked as tough as the US black belts... because the US black belts were all adult males who were inclined towards fighting before they ever stepped into the dojo.
> 
> The make up of students is much more diverse now, and belt factory schools aside, the average black belt will reflect that. The fact is that in the countries where these arts originate, getting to black belt is between a year and two years and has been since the arts were founded should tell you that you need to realign your perception of what a black belt is.
> 
> Or simply say that it takes that three to four years at your school and that other schools differ... instead of simply writing them all off as crap.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Twin Fist said:


> pretty sure Chuck Norris would qualify under the "fan-friggin-tastic" clause i sighted earlier Daniel



To which I say, yes he's fantastic, but everyone else who received their black belts at the same time probably took about the same time (less than two years) and were not fantastic. As I said, Chuck was exception*al *but not an _exception_ to the rule.



Twin Fist said:


> but how many people are Chuck Norris?


How many people are Tim Tebow? The rest of the rookie QBs who graduated from college probably played for the same amount of time that he did; likely four to six years before high school and four years a piece in high school and college. You only get one or two Tim Tebows a year. They are exceptional players, but they are not exceptions to the rule; two different things.

A twelve year old kid with a 200 IQ who is placed into college is an *exception *to the rule; he or she leapfrogged most or all of middle school and all of high school. A twelve year old kid with a 200 IQ who goes through middle school and high school before going into college is _exceptional_, but is not being made an _exception_.



Twin Fist said:


> and who says you have to be a 4th to open a school? i did it as a 2nd.


A lot of people. By second dan, most people have not learned the entire system. A first dan in considered a beginning degree, so that makes you an exception. Which is fine, by the way; but there are plenty of people who would apply to you the same standard that you are applying to two year or less first dans. 

You bust chops on the Kukkiwon, but the Kukkiwon considers fourth dan and higher to be instructor degrees. Based on your logic of time in grade, they are stricter about it than your instructors were. 

That is not a slam at your ability as an instructor or to those who promoted you, by the way.  Just pointing out that people _could_ look at your own time in grade and make similar assumptions of you that you do of other TKD schools and orgs.



Twin Fist said:


> My instructors did it as 1st, but back then, there were no morons giving BB's to 5 year olds either,
> 
> the belt meant more back then


Did it?

I think that it is more accurate to say that the commercialization that exists today did not exist back then. Back then, a first dan was a fairly low grade and both it and the belt were used for competition bracketing. Still is on both counts, so I disagree that it meant more.



Twin Fist said:


> so, to be clear
> 
> it only takes a year -two years in KOREA, in japan it is a different story. They still have standards.
> 
> the KKW just said that they are cool with 1 year bb's right?
> 
> so either:
> 1- they dont care how well you know it
> 
> or
> 
> 2- what they consider BB material isnt very much or very complicated.


Honestly, taekwondo isn't very complicated and first dan isn't at all advanced.


----------



## andyjeffries

Daniel Sullivan said:


> You also understand that the whole system of rank is lifted from a Japanese game of Reversi (popularly known as Othelo)?



I'm sure you know this, but just in case others quote you in the future, it's not Japanese Reversi/Othelo, it's a separate game called Go in Japanese, Baduk in Korean or Weiqi in Chinese.  It's all about survival, positioning and territory.  There are a lot of sayings about military strategy that are directly applicable to Go.  Reversi uses swapping over over markers when they are in between two opposite colour markers and places the markers in the squares.  Go uses capturing of stones when all four liberties (intersections between lines) are covered by enemy stones (or otherwise unavailable, e.g. on the edges of the board) and places the markers on these intersections between two lines.

I started learning Go because I had a friend when I was much younger telling me how cool chess was and I read a quote saying "they're developing computer software that can beat grandmasters in chess, but they aren't even close to making one that can beat an average teenage Go player in the far east. It's like playing four games of chess simultaneously".

It's a very simple game, but lots of fun.  I only ever played with friends (never ranked), but really enjoyed it (until my closest go playing friend died in a motorcycle accident - I pretty much haven't played since).

What interests me is that when they "lifted" the rank system from Go, they didn't bring it over in it's exact form. Ignoring the number of kyu (geup) before 1st Dan, Go has separate ranks for professional and amateurs (such that a 6-7th Dan Amateur may be able to compete with a 1st Dan Professional).  I'm surprised they didn't keep the distinction or use a similar system where there are dan ranks for competitors and dan ranks for teachers, or something.

I understand some BJJ schools do this (white band on your belt for a competitor black belt, red if you're a teacher black belt).

Cheers,


Andy


----------



## Twin Fist

i agree, TKD isnt complicated at all really. It is the wing chun of korea.

i disagree that it meanbt less, in fank it meant MUCH more then than it does now

and actually, back then, BB was THE rank. it wasnt untill the 70's really that you  even saw stripes on BB's

when i started, in 84, the six schools were all operated by 2nd's

the guy in charge of the whole org was a 4th.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

andyjeffries said:


> *I'm sure you know this*, but just in case others quote you in the future, it's not Japanese Reversi/Othelo, it's a separate game called Go in Japanese, Baduk in Korean or Weiqi in Chinese.


Yes, I do, but I was going for simplicity and to point out that the system was lifted from a game and was not created for or by martial arts instructors.  The belts were invented by Kano, who I believe was inspired by ribbons given out to competitive swimmers.  There is no historical significance to rank belts, black or otherwise.

Also, if I am not mistaken, the judo-gi was based on the undergarments that Japanese wore under their kimono and hakama.  I had also heard that the karate-gi is essentially the undergarments that Japanese wore under their kimono and hakama.  I do not know if that is accurate, however.


----------



## Gemini

Twin Fist said:


> there were no morons giving BB's to 5 year olds either,i


Just curious, if your training included manners. I personally haven't awarded a 5 year old black belt, but would not hesitate to do so under the right circumstances. More to the point, I know people that have, that I have a great deal of respect for. Having differing opinions is always fine and while sometimes it may get passionate, I'd appreciate it if you'd drop the name calling of people you don't even know.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Honestly, taekwondo isn't very complicated and first dan isn't at all advanced.



I recall expressing a similar viewpoint in the past that TKD as GENERALLY TAUGHT is not a complex martial arts system.  I was taken to task by some people for saying such, particularly on the ITF side, and they gave some good evidence that General Choi had formally classified all the variations of specific techniques such as the side kick and so their kicking practice at the very least has nuance to it.

I've also expressed in the past that TKD should be more than a punchy, kicky art, and that excellent TKD should contain a goodly amount of technical influences from judo and body conditioning from karate as that was the background many of the early TKD men had.  No one ever disagrees in full with that statement, yet if we explore it, we should come to the conclusion that even a chodan in TKD, trained in a serious fashion complete with those methods, is not a trivial undertaking.  

I suppose whether TKD is simple or whether a 1st dan is advanced or low level depends on what we think a 1st dan in TKD ought to know.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Twin Fist said:


> i agree, TKD isnt complicated at all really. It is the wing chun of korea.
> 
> i disagree that it meanbt less, in fank it meant MUCH more then than it does now
> 
> and actually, back then, BB was THE rank. it wasnt untill the 70's really that you even saw stripes on BB's
> 
> when i started, in 84, the six schools were all operated by 2nd's
> 
> the guy in charge of the whole org was a 4th.


I question that it was THE rank; there were high dans by the 1970's in Korea.  For one, BB is not a rank, but a representation of about ten ranks, none of which are differentiated by belt color.  GM Uhm Woon Kyu who signed my KKW ildan may have been ninth dan, but his belt is the same color as my belt.  

So while black belt may be THE belt, it is not a rank, though I suspect that it has always been promoted as such in the US because Americans are accustomed to education going on for a set period and then ending with a certification, from which they either persue higher certifications or use their existing certification to either pad their resume or to simply adorn their wall, their training goals having been met.

Another issue is that a good number of the servicemen who brought martial arts back to the US only were able to train up to first or second dan before returning home.  As they couldn't promote any higher than a rank below their own, the highest rank in their school was one below whatever rank they held, usually first dan.  

By 1980, taekwondo had been developed to a point that there was considerable material after first dan, such that a second dan would not have learned the entire system.

Part of the reason that a black belt may have 'meant more' in 1984 is simply because there were not that many of them and the general population didn't know what a black belt entailed.  I can tell you that when I started training, I was told that first dan was only the beginning, and I started training in the seventies.

I will conceed that the level of commercialization that exists today did not exist in 1984, but it was already well underway by then.  I will also conceed that the quanity of belt factories was much lower at that time.  By the mid to late eighties, the modern commercial dojo/dojang was well established and there were many of them.  I trained in one called 'Kim's Karate' in Rockville in 1988.  That school would have fit right in with modern schools, allowing for differences in forms and sparring between schools of differing federations.

Honestly, anyone could get just as hung up on you having been only a second dan running a school as you do on schools issuing black belts to children.  And you could give them all of the explanations in the world to justify it, but if they cannot get past the grade of second dan, then nothing that you would have said to them would have mattered.  As I understand you are fourth or fifth dan now, which are considered instructor ranks and would raise no eyebrows.

A lot of it is a matter of perspective.  You're more concerned about what qualifies as a first dan holder.  Personally, I'm more concerned about what qualifies as an instructor, due to things that I encountered in the last school where I trained.  Who is wearing what color belts concerns me less; it simply tells me where they are in the curriculum.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> I recall expressing a similar viewpoint in the past that TKD as GENERALLY TAUGHT is not a complex martial arts system. I was taken to task by some people for saying such, particularly on the ITF side, and they gave some good evidence that General Choi had formally classified all the variations of specific techniques such as the side kick and so their kicking practice at the very least has nuance to it.


The Kukkiwon has similar nuances to kicks and strikes, but that doesn't make it complicated.  When I said 'complicated' to Twin Fist, I was speaking of the complexity of individual techniques.  A side kick is not complicated.  Getting it right and and doing it well takes practice, but the mechanics are not particularly complicated.  Most kicks that are difficult are difficult because they require a degree of athleticism that is difficult for most people to attain, but that does not make them complicated. 



dancingalone said:


> I've also expressed in the past that TKD should be more than a punchy, kicky art, and that excellent TKD should contain a goodly amount of technical influences from judo and body conditioning from karate as that was the background many of the early TKD men had. No one ever disagrees in full with that statement, yet if we explore it, we should come to the conclusion that even a chodan in TKD, trained in a serious fashion complete with those methods, is not a trivial undertaking.


Depends on how you structure the curriculum.  If you have punchy kicky in colored belts and don't introduce throws and locks until first dan, then there would be little difference.  However, the average time to BB in hapkido from feedback that I have received is that it is pretty much in line with what is seen in taekwondo; two years on average in the states.  I could be wrong, as that is feedback that I have personally received, not hard data.  But given that hapkido actually has more kicks than TKD, I don't see where TKD with some grappling would be radically longer to first dan.



dancingalone said:


> I suppose whether TKD is simple or whether a 1st dan is advanced or low level depends on what we think a 1st dan in TKD ought to know.


Well, if dan grades go up to ninth or tenth dan and it takes over thirty five years to get to ninth and over forty to get to tenth dan, then it really doesn't matter what you think TKD ought to be; first dan is still *very* early on in the grading structure, even if it takes you six years to get there.  From first dan to sixth dan, you are looking at approximately fifteen years of training.  So regardless of what you are including in taekwondo, I consider first dan to be a beginning dan.  You used the term, "Chodan" above.  Does not chodan mean 'beginning dan?'


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> The Kukkiwon has similar nuances to kicks and strikes, but that doesn't make it complicated.  When I said 'complicated' to Twin Fist, I was speaking of the complexity of individual techniques.  A side kick is not complicated.  Getting it right and and doing it well takes practice, but the mechanics are not particularly complicated.  Most kicks that are difficult are difficult because they require a degree of athleticism that is difficult for most people to attain, but that does not make them complicated.



How the techniques are integrated into an overall fighting system is where the complication comes in.  Stances, footwork, range, compound movements, tactical preferences, all acting together to realize a specifically taught method of fighting.   In contrast, any single technique practiced in isolation can be regarded as simple.  Anyone can do a sidekick in the air.  On the other hand, can anyone maintain correct distancing in order to snap out an effective piercing side snap kick to the floating ribs when an attacker is bearing down on you with a wild attack of his own?  This is exactly the kind of performance outcome that requires targeted training as well as seasoning that only comes with time to pull off.  Add in a throw or a pin and you've increased the difficulty of integration by an order of magnitude.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Depends on how you structure the curriculum.  If you have punchy kicky in colored belts and don't introduce throws and locks until first dan, then there would be little difference.  However, the average time to BB in hapkido from feedback that I have received is that it is pretty much in line with what is seen in taekwondo; two years on average in the states.  I could be wrong, as that is feedback that I have personally received, not hard data.  But given that hapkido actually has more kicks than TKD, I don't see where TKD with some grappling would be radically longer to first dan.



The hapkido I am most familiar with is that practiced by some people who are in GM JR West's group.  They practice his curriculum and admittedly do some local stuff as well.  They teach both throwing and locking techniques as soon as the first colored rank is achieved (yellow).  They take about 4-5 years to promote a consistent student to chodan.  That 5 years thing seems to creep up an awful lot.

IMO TKD with grappling should be taught similarly.  You introduce the idea early on - the student doesn't have to be immediately proficient - otherwise you might end up with students who have a clear preference for striking and the medium to long ranges.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Well, if dan grades go up to ninth or tenth dan and it takes over thirty five years to get to ninth and over forty to get to tenth dan, then it really doesn't matter what you think TKD ought to be; first dan is still *very* early on in the grading structure, even if it takes you six years to get there.  From first dan to sixth dan, you are looking at approximately fifteen years of training.  So regardless of what you are including in taekwondo, I consider first dan to be a beginning dan.  You used the term, "Chodan" above.  Does not chodan mean 'beginning dan?'



Forgive me, but you're really looking at this through the KKW lens too much.  There are TKD styles that have more material front-ended, where there is not any new technical knowledge or curriculum after 4th dan or so.  I'm approaching this from a general TKD perspective where I'd rather see visible differences in even the brown belts from the purple belts and focused sharpness when comparing the chodans to the red belts.


----------



## mastercole

andyjeffries said:


> Master Cole, I'd be interested in hearing in your words what you feel a black belt means to the founders of Taekwondo.  I know you've talked with many of the founders and I know you'd be paraphrasing/going from memory, but I'm interested in what they've had to say on the topic.



I have no personal opinion on what the belt means. But I can share what I have been told by the Taekwondo founders/pioneers living in Korea, whom I have spoken to and learned from directly while I was in Korea.

What they have related to me is this.  Being awarded Dan, whether it be via hard work, good skill, dedication, contribution, allied support or a combination of those things, means that one is now accepted into Taekwondo as a member.  What Dan level a person is awarded is generally based on to what degree a Dan holder has endeavored in these mentioned pursuits and highers levels of Dan are used to encourage the Dan holder into deeper, extended pursuit.  

Some founder types have went on to talk about Dan further saying basically that 9th Dan being the highest and last Dan means that the 9th Dan holder no longer needs Dan level awards to continue pursuit of excellence in these mentioned pursuits as through long dedication and striving for excellence they no longer desire award/reward for their efforts, their efforts are for altruistic reasons now. Symbolizing they have become empty of such desire (s) (probably many years early on).

About the belt

The various colors of the geup belts represent the various spectrum of human emotion. The geup holder experiences the spectrum of these internal obstacles, eventually combining them all, and as when you combine all primary colors, you get black and black represents the emptiness of the vast emptiness of the universe (taegeuk). The goal for color belt experience is black belt understanding.

The black color of the Dan belt represents the new Dan holders realization that the new goal is the death of these emotions (ignorance's, desires, delusion) they identified as a geup holder. The new Dan holder, who now has basic talent, confronts these internal obstacles via the pursuit of refinement and excellence. This confrontation with the self, will take place for many years across many levels as long as the Dan holder does not give up, eventually the Dan holder should victor over the self (pil-seung) and no longer be challenged by these internal obstacles. The 9th Dan represents this in it's symbolism as finality and death.  This type of person, after actual physical death, can be considered for 10th Dan, which is symbolic that this persons altruistic contributions live on, still making great contribution to others. 10th Dan (Ship Dan) is symbolic in this way as it relates to the "shipjangsang" of the "ten longest living things" from ancient Korean philosophy of nature worship, being that this person, award 10th Dan after death, still lives on through their works.

The belt it self as something tangible and separate from the Dan holds a meaning that it binds together heaven and earth. The dobok top being heaven, the pants earth.  What binds heaven and earth?  Humans do. So the belt means "humanity."  Human is a combination of their thoughts of heaven and earth and live between heaven and earth, binding them through conscience and self. The belt its has the shape of the square, or a plane representing stability and earth. The wrapping of the belt around the human in the shape of a circle (point), represents instability and the sky/heavens (think flight, free from earth), and the triangle knot made by double tying in opposite directions (um/yang) has the shape of a triangle (vertical line) and represents a human who is effected by heaven (instability) and earth (stability).

This meaning of the belt (part of the dobok) comes form the yukhak principle. Every movement/action, shape/thought, no mater how minor, of every single technique of Taekwondo is based on the yukhak principle. This gets much more complex and must be crossed over physically to even begin to explain the rest, so it can't be completely written out here.


----------



## mastercole

dancingalone said:


> Originally Posted by *Daniel Sullivan*
> 
> Well, if dan grades go up to ninth or tenth dan and it takes over thirty five years to get to ninth and over forty to get to tenth dan, then it really doesn't matter what you think TKD ought to be; first dan is still *very* early on in the grading structure, even if it takes you six years to get there. From first dan to sixth dan, you are looking at approximately fifteen years of training. So regardless of what you are including in taekwondo, I consider first dan to be a beginning dan. You used the term, "Chodan" above. Does not chodan mean 'beginning dan?'
> 
> 
> 
> Forgive me, but you're really looking at this through the KKW lens too much. There are TKD styles that have more material front-ended, where there is not any new technical knowledge or curriculum after 4th dan or so. I'm approaching this from a general TKD perspective where I'd rather see visible differences in even the brown belts from the purple belts and focused sharpness when comparing the chodans to the red belts.



Being that Kukkiwon Taekwondo is the most common Taekwondo found in the world (internationally) I would think that it would be the "general" type and this generally type of Taekwondo is not known for locks and throws, especially at color belt levels.  What would these other styles be?  An older form from Chung Do Kwan, Jidokwan, or other Kwan, or something hybrid?


----------



## dancingalone

mastercole said:


> Being that Kukkiwon Taekwondo is the most common Taekwondo found in the world (internationally) I would think that it would be the "general" type and this generally type of Taekwondo is not known for locks and throws, especially at color belt levels.



<shrugs>  That's true enough.  A strange development to my way of thinking, but it is what it is.  

I prefer a more complete approach, and so that is what I teach.


----------



## mastercole

dancingalone said:


> <shrugs>  That's true enough.  A strange development to my way of thinking, but it is what it is.
> 
> I prefer a more complete approach, and so that is what I teach.



I am the same way in that I strive to completely understand Taekwondo and not go searching outside of Taekwondo looking for things to "complete" it, it's already complete, I just need to study deeply to find it.


----------



## dancingalone

mastercole said:


> I am the same way in that I strive to completely understand Taekwondo and not go searching outside of Taekwondo looking for things to "complete" it, it's already complete, I just need to study deeply to find it.



Are you saying it is complete in the sense that it contains close range fighting methods already?  Or are you saying it is a striking art primarily and thus already is complete _a priori_?

I could see someone rationally making an argument either way.  I obviously trend towards the first interpretation myself though I believe the majority of TKD instructors neglect the close range for whatever reason.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> How the techniques are integrated into an overall fighting system is where the complication comes in. Stances, footwork, range, compound movements, tactical preferences, all acting together to realize a specifically taught method of fighting. In contrast, any single technique practiced in isolation can be regarded as simple. Anyone can do a sidekick in the air. On the other hand, can anyone maintain correct distancing in order to snap out an effective piercing side snap kick to the floating ribs when an attacker is bearing down on you with a wild attack of his own? This is exactly the kind of performance outcome that requires targeted training as well as seasoning that only comes with time to pull off. Add in a throw or a pin and you've increased the difficulty of integration by an order of magnitude.


I consider that challenging, though not necesarilly complicated.



dancingalone said:


> The hapkido I am most familiar with is that practiced by some people who are in GM JR West's group. They practice his curriculum and admittedly do some local stuff as well. They teach both throwing and locking techniques as soon as the first colored rank is achieved (yellow). They take about 4-5 years to promote a consistent student to chodan. That 5 years thing seems to creep up an awful lot.


Probably depends on what groups or schools you are familiar with.  What group is GM JR West with?



dancingalone said:


> Forgive me, but *you're really looking at this through the KKW lens too much*. There are TKD styles that have more material front-ended, where there is not any new technical knowledge or curriculum after 4th dan or so. I'm approaching this from a general TKD perspective where I'd rather see visible differences in even the brown belts from the purple belts and focused sharpness when comparing the chodans to the red belts.


I am?  

Most of the material in KKW is learned prior to first dan and I have not stated otherwise.  I have stated that there has been enough material after second dan to say that a second dan has not learned the entire system.  I would also go so far as to say that I would be leary of training at a school where the head instructor was only second dan.  I would not dismiss them out of hand, but it would be a red flag in my opinion.

My main art is Kendo, which is pretty front ended also.  What separates advanced practitioners is not the quantity of techniques but the depth of techniques.  As a general rule, the quality of a kendoka can be determined by seeing them practice one technique: shomen uchi.  I once had a Korean (from Korea) TKD instructor who told me that he could tell how long a taekwondoist had been training by looking at their back stance alone.  He was a fourth dan and there was a world of difference in how he executed the geub level techniques as compared to a first or even a second dan.  

Knowing the techniques and having proficiency in them to the point of being able to use them effectively when sparring is not overly complicated in any MA that has a sportive element to it.  But the depth of one's skill at fifth dan is (or at least should be) very different than the depth of one's skill at first dan, even if there are only a handful of new techniques between first and fifth.

I don't know what these other "TKD styles" are if they aren't ITF or ATA, but I do know that most MA systems that uses the kyu/dan system consider chodan students to be beginners who have learned the basics of the art.  Even if a style front loads the material so that virtually every technique is learned in colored belts and one spends five years in colored belts, they've still essentially beginners in the art.  Some may be very athletically gifted, but they are gifted novices.  
Saying that front loading the material makes them somehow not a still a novice in the art is like saying that a law student is an experienced lawyer because he just passed the bar.  He is not an experienced lawyer at that point and he certainly is no law professor, even though he may have learned what needs to proficiently practice his field of law.


----------



## dancingalone

mastercole said:


> What would these other styles be?  An older form from Chung Do Kwan, Jidokwan, or other Kwan, or something hybrid?



I had in mind a Moo Duk Kwan Tae Kwon Do group that was active in Texas and Oklahoma in the seventies and eighties.  Not sure if they are around any more though I know some guys from that group have moved onto other affiliations.  In any case, this group had no new material after 4th or 5th dan.  The master level material were Korean versions of the Japanese karate forms like Sip Soo and Kong Sang Koon.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> <shrugs> That's true enough. A strange development to my way of thinking, but it is what it is.
> 
> I prefer a more complete approach, and so that is what I teach.


So what happened to these other styles?  It seems that you are looking at this primarilly through the lens of what you teach and what you feel that taekwondo ought to be.  

I have no criticism of what you think in this regard; we've conversed enough for me to say that I think very highly of how you look at things.  But I do think that if you are going to reference 'other styles' of taekwondo as your support for viewing chodan as anything other than a beginning dan, it would be nice to know what these other styles are, particularly if they are not ATA or ITF, where first dan is considered a beginning dan and a fairly low rank.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> I had in mind a Moo Duk Kwan Tae Kwon Do group that was active in Texas and Oklahoma in the seventies and eighties. Not sure if they are around any more though I know some guys from that group have moved onto other affiliations. In any case, this group had no new material after 4th or 5th dan. The master level material were Korean versions of the Japanese karate forms like Sip Soo and Kong Sang Koon.


Half of MDK joined the KKW.  The half that didn't was tang soo do so far as I know, which is not taekwondo, but Korean karate.  

Though if they have new material up to fifth dan, and assuming that fifth dan is roughly ten years after chodan, then that sounds like a pretty substantial amount of material.  So yes, I would still consider chodan to be a beginning dan and a fairly low rank.


----------



## mastercole

dancingalone said:


> Are you saying it is complete in the sense that it contains close range fighting methods already?  Or are you saying it is a striking art primarily and thus already is complete _a priori_?
> 
> I could see someone rationally making an argument either way.  I obviously trend towards the first interpretation myself though I believe the majority of TKD instructors neglect the close range for whatever reason.



I think differently. First, Taekwondo is my way of life and has been for some time now. For me my interest in martial arts started out as a component to improve my fighting/self defense ability. Later it became all about self discovery. Ultimately, self discovery is about self defense, on all levels. 

As for a grappling curriculum, no, we do not have a highly developed grappling curriculum in Taekwondo, nor do we need one, for either self discovery or for self defense. I am completely satisfied with what is there in Taekwondo, that is why I ended up staying here. I never felt the need to add grappling, bow and arrow, shooting or any other martial art skills to it.  Knowing myself defends me the best against those threats.


----------



## mastercole

There seems to be to much concern in regard to learning a curriculum or system of a martial art. It do not think the real value is in the curriculum or system, I feel it is in the exploration of technique and subsequent application of the techniques.

To many people can demonstrate 1-30 of this, and 1-50 of that, and all the forms in this or that, but have no real evolution in skills. Evolution in actual technical skill and application skill to me, is the greater learning.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

mastercole said:


> There seems to be to much concern in regard to learning a curriculum or system of a martial art. It do not think the real value is in the curriculum or system, I feel it is in the exploration of technique and subsequent application of the techniques.
> 
> To many people can demonstrate 1-30 of this, and 1-50 of that, and all the forms in this or that, but have no real evolution in skills. Evolution in actual technical skill and application skill to me, is the greater learning.


Here, here!!


----------



## puunui

SPX said:


> Well it's like I said, yes, according to the requirements of that organization, yes, my black belt would've been legitimate.  But everyone has their own idea of what the general concept of "black belt" should reflect.  Your concept seems to be . . . whatever the organization says it is.  But there are clearly posters on here who feel that, regardless of style, regardless of organization, there are essential qualities which should be present when thinking of "a black belt."




Everyone has their own idea of what a "black belt" is. All instructors have their own standards and also their own reasons for promoting someone to "black belt". Where the disagreements come about is when someone uses their own standards or their organization's standards to judge the legitimacy of someone's promotion who is outside their organization, instructor, or even style. How fair is it to judge a judo rank, from a taekwondo perspective?


----------



## puunui

andyjeffries said:


> _A 1st Poom/Dan should be confident in being able to teach small groups of students (e.g. up to 4 people) basic techniques and early patterns. Their movements should be mainly correct. If they have small errors they should be able to be told them and correct them without needing constant reminding - they should be self-motivated._



Personally, I don't think 1st Poom/Dan should be teaching anyone anything. They should be focused primarily on their own learning and development. There is plenty of time to get into teaching later down the path. Same for 2nd Poom/Dan.


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> I've owned a commercial dojang for almost 4 months now.  I can tell everyone that one of the most common questions I answer for prospects and/or their parents is 'How long does it take to get a black belt'.  To a lesser extent, a few of them have had previous experience elsewhere and they can be a little surprised when I tell them my best guesstimate is that training 2-3 times a week for an hour at a time, it might take 3+ years to attain sufficient physical competence to be awarded a chodan (and this is hardly a grueling gauntlet of time).



Give it time. You may change your views soon enough, or at least understand why other instructors promote quicker than you are used to. Also, I believe kukki taekwondo calls it il dan now, and has retired the cho dan terminology.


----------



## miguksaram

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Guess old Chuck Norris _really_ must be crap! He started in 1958 and was back in the US opening a chain of dojos in 1962. Sounds like less than two years to black belt to me (I'm pretty sure that he got his in about a year). And to open a dojo in only four years.... when everyone knows that you have to be at least fourth dan to open a dojo... and that takes at least another four years.... Chuck must have been totally unqualified!!


Actually if you think about the vast majority of servicemen who received their black belts in the military back in that time, then they would have all been considered crap and unqualified to open a dojo when they came back to the states.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> So what happened to these other styles?  It seems that you are looking at this primarilly through the lens of what you teach and what you feel that taekwondo ought to be.



If we're talking about TKD with close range methods added, perhaps it never truly existed under the name of 'taekwondo'.  I reference what was known about the early TKD men where it is said a bunch of them trained judo as well, such as the accounts of GM Chun, Sang Sup studying judo in high school and then later teaching karate/tkd to judo practitioners at one of the gymnasiums in Seoul (slipped my mind).  There are other examples surely.

So if as TKD became organized and codified, it would seem like these founders did not necessarily pass on everything they knew and learned to their creation.  Regardless, this is what I mean when I speak about old school TKD as practiced by the founders - strong karate enhanced by the addition of powerful Korean kicking as well as grappling methods received through judo. 



Daniel Sullivan said:


> But I do think that if you are going to reference 'other styles' of taekwondo as your support for viewing chodan as anything other than a beginning dan, it would be nice to know what these other styles are, particularly if they are not ATA or ITF, where first dan is considered a beginning dan and a fairly low rank.



Well I mentioned the Moo Duk Kwan TKD group above... There's also the 'Texkwondo' Jhoon Rhee system I personally trained in.  You pretty much had learned everything by 2nd dan in the style, except for a few dan forms (we didn't use all the Chang Hon forms - maybe 4 of the dan hyung in addition to the color belt forms as well as learning a few Japanese forms).


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Guess old Chuck Norris _really_ must be crap! He started in 1958 and was back in the US opening a chain of dojos in 1962. Sounds like less than two years to black belt to me (I'm pretty sure that he got his in about a year). And to open a dojo in only four years.... when everyone knows that you have to be at least fourth dan to open a dojo... and that takes at least another four years.... Chuck must have been totally unqualified!!




I believe GM Norris received his Moo Duk Kwan 1st Dan in 18 months. I want to say he flunked his first test and came back in six months and passed.


----------



## Twin Fist

Gemini said:


> Just curious, if your training included manners. I personally haven't awarded a 5 year old black belt, but would not hesitate to do so under the right circumstances. More to the point, I know people that have, that I have a great deal of respect for. Having differing opinions is always fine and while sometimes it may get passionate, I'd appreciate it if you'd drop the name calling of people you don't even know.



and i would appreciate it if there were not people giving BB's to barely potty trained infants


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I would argue that it hasn't evolved in the countries where the art originated but that the idea of the black belt was taken and changed into 'martial arts master' by returning US servicemen who brought the art back here.  That doesn't mean that the idea has evolved; simply that it was never properly communicated in the first place.



Right, those servicemen who went overseas to study martial arts generally received their 1st dan in about one year of training. They enjoyed martial arts training and so when they left, they started their own schools, as 1st Dan "black belts". But their problem was how to promote their students. They did not have sufficient rank to promote to dan levels, so they began to lengthen the time required for promotion. If and when their students questioned their own one year promotions, fantastic stories of 8-10 hour training, seven days per week started coming out. Hence, the urban legend that black belt that takes 5 or more years to earn, when in fact, it took one year of ordinary training, and still does.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Half of MDK joined the KKW.  The half that didn't was tang soo do so far as I know, which is not taekwondo, but Korean karate.




Not sure how this group ended up calling themselves Moo Duk Kwan Tae Kwon Do but that's what their name was.  It was all over their uniform patches.  As far as their curriculum, it was pretty much what I think of when Tang Soo Do comes up in conversation.  Japanese forms executed with TSD variations, big emphasis on hip twist and reverse hip twist.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Though if they have new material up to fifth dan, and assuming that fifth dan is roughly ten years after chodan, then that sounds like a pretty substantial amount of material.  So yes, I would still consider chodan to be a beginning dan and a fairly low rank.



Daniel, where the difference comes in is that these guys had very high standards for awarding their black belts.  So 'beginning' dan rank or not, their chodans looked like black belts in every sense of the term.  They didn't give their students any slack because 1st dan is the first dan rank.


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> I've also expressed in the past that TKD should be more than a punchy, kicky art, and that excellent TKD should contain a goodly amount of technical influences from judo and body conditioning from karate as that was the background many of the early TKD men had.  No one ever disagrees in full with that statement, yet if we explore it, we should come to the conclusion that even a chodan in TKD, trained in a serious fashion complete with those methods, is not a trivial undertaking.



I don't know about the judo part, since that is a separate art, but there is body conditioning, in the form of hogu drills. Hogu drills toughen one's body to take blows and you also learn to minimize the effects of hard blows, while being a good training partner.


----------



## mastercole

dancingalone said:


> I had in mind a Moo Duk Kwan Tae Kwon Do group that was active in Texas and Oklahoma in the seventies and eighties.  Not sure if they are around any more though I know some guys from that group have moved onto other affiliations.  In any case, this group had no new material after 4th or 5th dan.  The master level material were Korean versions of the Japanese karate forms like Sip Soo and Kong Sang Koon.



Might be folks from GM Jack Hwang. A friend of mine in OK visits GM Hwang from time to time and has interesting conversations with him. GM Hwang signed the document that formed the WTF as USA representative, along with GM Ed Sell.  I used to practice that set of hyung; pyongahn, chulki, balsaek, sipsoo, ohshipsabo, kongsangkun, etc.  Some instructors do add additional sets of forms to their higher dan curriculum. The ones I know who do so told me they need something else to teach the higher dans to keep them motivated. I understand this, but then, it's not for me.  When I was in Europe with GM Dae Sung Lee of Hawaii he asked to follow me through Bassai-dai, he always liked that form and also wanted to teach it to his students. GM Lee was a very good fighter and he is also excellent at forms. He figured Bassai-dai out in a day, and the next day he was performing it amazing, like he has done it for 30 years. 

Anyway, I think that that current material learned is simple a gate into deeper learning, learning that takes the rest of our life. No need arrive/discover another gate that I might not ever enter, especially if I have not already entered the existing gates that I have already discovered the opening.  This is why I tell my Dan holders "dig deeper" and "grind fine."  Nothing I came up with myself, something that was said to me some time ago.


----------



## dancingalone

mastercole said:


> There seems to be to much concern in regard to learning a curriculum or system of a martial art. It do not think the real value is in the curriculum or system, I feel it is in the exploration of technique and subsequent application of the techniques.
> 
> To many people can demonstrate 1-30 of this, and 1-50 of that, and all the forms in this or that, but have no real evolution in skills. Evolution in actual technical skill and application skill to me, is the greater learning.



Precisely.


----------



## Twin Fist

TKD IS a simple art, but you might not know it if you hadnt studied other arts.

kajukembo is MUCH more complex and EPAK is like nuclear physics compared to TKD



dancingalone said:


> I recall expressing a similar viewpoint in the past that TKD as GENERALLY TAUGHT is not a complex martial arts system.  I was taken to task by some people for saying such, particularly on the ITF side, and they gave some good evidence that General Choi had formally classified all the variations of specific techniques such as the side kick and so their kicking practice at the very least has nuance to it.
> 
> I've also expressed in the past that TKD should be more than a punchy, kicky art, and that excellent TKD should contain a goodly amount of technical influences from judo and body conditioning from karate as that was the background many of the early TKD men had.  No one ever disagrees in full with that statement, yet if we explore it, we should come to the conclusion that even a chodan in TKD, trained in a serious fashion complete with those methods, is not a trivial undertaking.
> 
> I suppose whether TKD is simple or whether a 1st dan is advanced or low level depends on what we think a 1st dan in TKD ought to know.


----------



## andyjeffries

puunui said:


> Everyone has their own idea of what a "black belt" is. All instructors have their own standards and also their own reasons for promoting someone to "black belt". Where the disagreements come about is when someone uses their own standards or their organization's standards to judge the legitimacy of someone's promotion who is outside their organization, instructor, or even style. How fair is it to judge a judo rank, from a taekwondo perspective?



I've been thinking about this a fair bit recently, regarding judging other Taekwondoin's rank.

When I see someone of a particular rank I used to think "they aren't worth X dan!".  Recently this has changed in my mind to be reworded slightly as "I wouldn't have given them X dan based on that performance".  Loss of exclamation mark and a slight softening of the wording.  This is significant to me because I feel it means that I've changed from purely judgemental of other masters' decisions to considering more what I feel a certain rank/person should demonstrate (solidifying in my head about how I will promote students to those ranks).  Also with the addition of the "based on that performance" I'm also giving a subtle nudge that it's not necessarily always about an objective level, but a subjective increase for that student and progression down a path.

This change may not seem much to others, but to me it feels like a subtle changing in my viewpoint that I like.


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Depends on how you structure the curriculum.  If you have punchy kicky in colored belts and don't introduce throws and locks until first dan, then there would be little difference.  However, the average time to BB in hapkido from feedback that I have received is that it is pretty much in line with what is seen in taekwondo; two years on average in the states.  I could be wrong, as that is feedback that I have personally received, not hard data.  But given that hapkido actually has more kicks than TKD, I don't see where TKD with some grappling would be radically longer to first dan.'




It takes about one year to earn a Hapkido 1st dan in Korea, same as a taekwondo 1st poom/dan. Personally, I don't really see what the big deal is over a 1st dan or 1st poom.


----------



## puunui

mastercole said:


> I am the same way in that I strive to completely understand Taekwondo and not go searching outside of Taekwondo looking for things to "complete" it, it's already complete, I just need to study deeply to find it.




I used to do that, try to study all these other arts in an effort to make taekwondo more "complete". But I abandoned that approach when I began gaining access to high level seniors and teachers and pioneers and information. Today, there is so much information that is freely given that there really is no need for anyone in kukki taekwondo to go outside their art for "completion". It's all there for the taking and studying. Instead, people still want to fight it. I really don't understand that.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> If we're talking about TKD with close range methods added, perhaps it never truly existed under the name of 'taekwondo'. I reference what was known about the early TKD men where it is said a bunch of them trained judo as well, such as the accounts of GM Chun, Sang Sup studying judo in high school and then later teaching karate/tkd to judo practitioners at one of the gymnasiums in Seoul (slipped my mind). There are other examples surely.
> 
> So if as TKD became organized and codified, it would seem like these founders did not necessarily pass on everything they knew and learned to their creation. Regardless, this is what I mean when I speak about old school TKD as practiced by the founders - strong karate enhanced by the addition of powerful Korean kicking as well as grappling methods received through judo.



Given that taekwondo has been codified in pretty much its current form for over forty five years and the founders transitioned from whatever they were doing before to create taekwondo, I would have a hard time calling the early stuff 'old school taekwondo.'  Given that the Kukkiwon does not limit what one teaches to just their curriculum, a modern school could still teach precisely what you describe above with regards to the grappling from judo and maybe some karate forms in addition to the core curriculum and it would be perfectly acceptable. 



dancingalone said:


> Well I mentioned the Moo Duk Kwan TKD group above... There's also the 'Texkwondo' Jhoon Rhee system I personally trained in. You pretty much had learned everything by 2nd dan in the style, except for a few dan forms (we didn't use all the Chang Hon forms - maybe 4 of the dan hyung in addition to the color belt forms as well as learning a few Japanese forms).


Well, after first dan in the Kukkiwon, you learn a few new Korean forms, but when I had trained I learned the vast majority of the technical material in the geub grades.  I continued training and learned Koryo and then was taught keum gang, and ultimately received dojo-dans for my second and third dans, but was never KKW certified and really only consider myself to be an ildan.  

Even though my former GM tasked me with teaching taekwondo, I consider myself unqualified to do so.  Part of the reason that I left was because I was not receiving training anymore; I would show up to train and was handed the class.  The trend seemed to be the same for other students who stayed on much past first dan.  By the time I left, he had twelve year old first and second pums teaching adult classes. Nice kids, and very good practitioners.  But not ready to teach in my opinion.


----------



## andyjeffries

puunui said:


> Personally, I don't think 1st Poom/Dan should be teaching anyone anything. They should be focused primarily on their own learning and development. There is plenty of time to get into teaching later down the path. Same for 2nd Poom/Dan.



I knew we'd disagree on that one ;-)

I no longer feel that it's right for 1st/2nd Dans to run their own clubs.  I ran a club as a 2nd Dan and with hindsight was nowhere near ready.   That said, if people want to run clubs as 1st/2nd Dan that's their business, but I wouldn't push a student of mine in to it.  However, I do think they should be getting some partial experience in teaching at Dan level.  The reason is that I spent quite a while helping my Grandmaster with teaching others and talking about teaching.  I learnt so much during that period on how to teach. I think it helped shape me in to a better teacher than I would have been without.

I'd like my students when they reach Dan level to have practice at teaching before they open their own club.

Out of interest, do the senior masters/grandmasters on here specifically put effort in to teaching their Dan level students how to teach?  At what grade does this take place and in what form?  Or do you just give them a nudge when they get to 4th Dan with no real teaching experience in to running their own club?

I've obviously had my path which feels like it works for me and want to pass that on to my students.  I may change this over time, but that's my feelings based on my current thoughts.


----------



## andyjeffries

puunui said:


> Give it time. You may change your views soon enough, or at least understand why other instructors promote quicker than you are used to. Also, I believe kukki taekwondo calls it il dan now, and has retired the cho dan terminology.



I've always heard it referred to as Ildan.  Chodan for me would seem like a throwback to the Japanese term Shodan, it feels weird to hear 1st Dan referred to as chodan to my ears.


----------



## puunui

andyjeffries said:


> I've been thinking about this a fair bit recently, regarding judging other Taekwondoin's rank.
> 
> When I see someone of a particular rank I used to think "they aren't worth X dan!".  Recently this has changed in my mind to be reworded slightly as "I wouldn't have given them X dan based on that performance".  Loss of exclamation mark and a slight softening of the wording.  This is significant to me because I feel it means that I've changed from purely judgemental of other masters' decisions to considering more what I feel a certain rank/person should demonstrate (solidifying in my head about how I will promote students to those ranks).  Also with the addition of the "based on that performance" I'm also giving a subtle nudge that it's not necessarily always about an objective level, but a subjective increase for that student and progression down a path.
> 
> This change may not seem much to others, but to me it feels like a subtle changing in my viewpoint that I like.



That's good. That's progress. You don't want to be thinking the same thoughts for your whole life.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> Not sure how this group ended up calling themselves Moo Duk Kwan Tae Kwon Do but that's what their name was. It was all over their uniform patches. As far as their curriculum, it was pretty much what I think of when Tang Soo Do comes up in conversation. Japanese forms executed with TSD variations, big emphasis on hip twist and reverse hip twist.


Sounds like Korean karate.  Probably a lot of fun too!



dancingalone said:


> Daniel, where the difference comes in is that these guys had very high standards for awarding their black belts. So 'beginning' dan rank or not, their chodans looked like black belts in every sense of the term. They didn't give their students any slack because 1st dan is the first dan rank.


Not sure where giving slack came up, but I will say that different arts will have different standards.  Given that the belts' primary usage is for competition bracketing *within* age, weight, and gender groups in ATA taekwondo (specifying as this is an ATA thread), there really is no comparison between ATA TKD and TSD.

As for the Kukkiwon, they do not issue a dan grade to practitioners under fifteen and the organization does not utilize black belts for those 14 and under practitioners (though many KKW schools in the states issue them anyway).  14 and under practitioners are issued a pum grade and a pum belt (black/red).  Belts in KKW TKD are also mainly for competition bracketing within age, weight and gender groups.


----------



## puunui

andyjeffries said:


> Out of interest, do the senior masters/grandmasters on here specifically put effort in to teaching their Dan level students how to teach?  At what grade does this take place and in what form?  Or do you just give them a nudge when they get to 4th Dan with no real teaching experience in to running their own club?




Being around until 4th Dan, you naturally will see teaching perspectives. I do believe that 3rd Dan should assist in teaching responsibilities, such that when they go out on their own, at 4th Dan, they have that experience. It is during the 3rd dan period that the assistant instructor starts thinking about how they will keep this, or change that, or get rid of this in favor of that, etc. Then at 4th Dan, they get to test their own theories out on their own students. When students open their own dojang, I as a general rule give them complete freedom to do and teach however they want. They can always come and ask, but they don't I generally keep my mouth shut and let them figure it out for themselves. Again, I am not into micromanaging or controlling my students. As 4th Dan, they can and should exercise their own freedom and judgment on how to do things. Similarly, when you start your own family, your parents leave you alone and you raise your kids as you see fit. Same thing. Ultimately, the martial arts, and life is about freedom, making choices, learning from those choices, and living with the consequences of those choices.


----------



## mastercole

dancingalone said:


> Not sure how this group ended up calling themselves Moo Duk Kwan Tae Kwon Do but that's what their name was.  It was all over their uniform patches.  As far as their curriculum, it was pretty much what I think of when Tang Soo Do comes up in conversation.  Japanese forms executed with TSD variations, big emphasis on hip twist and reverse hip twist.



GM Hwang Kee joined Moo Duk Kwan into the Kwan unification, creating "Taekwondo Moo Duk Kwan" only to get upset because he was not selected as the leader and resigned the KTA. When he did so, only about 20% of Moo Duk Kwan followed him, the other 80% or so stayed in the KTA as "Taekwondo Moo Duk Kwan" following GM Hwang's senior student, GM HONG Chong Soo. 

So some Moo Duk Kwan members in the USA followed Taekwondo Moo Duk Kwan in whole, or in name only. So we see folks with the Taekwondo Moo Duk Kwan patch, practicing what we would call "Tang Soo Do".



dancingalone said:


> Daniel, where the difference comes in is that these guys had very high standards for awarding their black belts.  So 'beginning' dan rank or not, their chodans looked like black belts in every sense of the term.  They didn't give their students any slack because 1st dan is the first dan rank.



Myself, I don't know if I would call their standards high, I think I would call them strict.  To me, a high standard would be a correctness of technique, compared to a standard, and back then, especially in the USA, most everyone, Korean and non-Korean lacked correctness of standard.  In earlier cases, the standard was still being set, so it was whatever goes.  Being strict was adhering to "whatever goes" at the time.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Given that taekwondo has been codified in pretty much its current form for over forty five years and the founders transitioned from whatever they were doing before to create taekwondo, I would have a hard time calling the early stuff 'old school taekwondo.'



I wouldn't.  I respect and honor ALL of the knowledge the people that created taekwondo had as it played a role no matter how small, no matter if it is not taught in the main now.  It is their complete personal experiences that made them who they are in the first place.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Given that the Kukkiwon does not limit what one teaches to just their curriculum, a modern school could still teach precisely what you describe above with regards to the grappling from judo and maybe some karate forms in addition to the core curriculum and it would be perfectly acceptable.



Certainly.  I do not question this.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Well, after first dan in the Kukkiwon, you learn a few new Korean forms, but when I had trained I learned the vast majority of the technical material in the geub grades.  I continued training and learned Koryo and then was taught keum gang, and ultimately received dojo-dans for my second and third dans, but was never KKW certified and really only consider myself to be an ildan.
> 
> Even though my former GM tasked me with teaching taekwondo, I consider myself unqualified to do so.  Part of the reason that I left was because I was not receiving training anymore; I would show up to train and was handed the class.  The trend seemed to be the same for other students who stayed on much past first dan.  By the time I left, he had twelve year old first and second pums teaching adult classes. Nice kids, and very good practitioners.  But not ready to teach in my opinion.



<Nods>


----------



## mastercole

andyjeffries said:


> I've been thinking about this a fair bit recently, regarding judging other Taekwondoin's rank.
> 
> When I see someone of a particular rank I used to think "they aren't worth X dan!".  Recently this has changed in my mind to be reworded slightly as "I wouldn't have given them X dan based on that performance".  Loss of exclamation mark and a slight softening of the wording.  This is significant to me because I feel it means that I've changed from purely judgemental of other masters' decisions to considering more what I feel a certain rank/person should demonstrate (solidifying in my head about how I will promote students to those ranks).  Also with the addition of the "based on that performance" I'm also giving a subtle nudge that it's not necessarily always about an objective level, but a subjective increase for that student and progression down a path.
> 
> This change may not seem much to others, but to me it feels like a subtle changing in my viewpoint that I like.



This is true, and I don't personally know the struggles a student of another instructor went through, or the struggles of that instructor to get that student to their current point. Therefore I can not judge them. 

Now if it is a student from another school that comes to train with us, I see they have great ability, but was never taught skill, I know there was something wrong, but who knows exactly what it was that was wrong.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Given that the belts' primary usage is for competition bracketing *within* age, weight, and gender groups in ATA taekwondo (specifying as this is an ATA thread), there really is no comparison between ATA TKD and TSD.



No, it's not.  Although competing is encouraged, many ATA students don't attend tournaments at all.  Like with most martial arts schools today, TKD or not, ATA or not, the belt rank is used to designate knowledge of curriculum and there is a certain connotation of proficiency attached as well.  



Daniel Sullivan said:


> As for the Kukkiwon, they do not issue a dan grade to practitioners under fifteen and the organization does not utilize black belts for those 14 and under practitioners (though many KKW schools in the states issue them anyway).  14 and under practitioners are issued a pum grade and a pum belt (black/red).  *Belts in KKW TKD are also mainly for competition bracketing within age, weight and gender groups.*



I really wonder how that idea is so proliferate in your perspective.  The school I purchased follows KKW guidelines.  They don't compete at all in AAU or USAT tournaments.  The belts are there to represent progression in the curriculum and in taekwondo in general.


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Half of MDK joined the KKW.  The half that didn't was tang soo do so far as I know, which is not taekwondo, but Korean karate.



Way more than half. I would say 90%, if not more went with Taekwondo. The Moo Duk Kwan was organized differently than other kwan, which were much more top down type organizations. Instead, the Moo Duk Kwan had a board of directors which voted on decisions, and that board voted to go with the KTA back in 1965. GM HWANG Kee disagreed with that, but what could he do. He was outvoted by the Moo Duk Kwan membership. 

Same with the ITF and General Choi. More than 90% of the seniors in the ITF left. Neither the Soobahkdo Hwe nor the ITF compared favorably in terms of size to kukki taekwondo. Instead of a USA vs. Russia superpower battle, it was more like Cuba vs. USA.


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> The school I purchased follows KKW guidelines.  They don't compete at all in AAU or USAT tournaments.  The belts are there to represent progression in the curriculum and in taekwondo in general.



Do you plan at some point to have your students compete at aau or usat tournaments? if there were a kukkiwon poomsae seminar or usat sparring clinic given in your area, would you consider attending?


----------



## mastercole

puunui said:


> It takes about one year to earn a Hapkido 1st dan in Korea, same as a taekwondo 1st poom/dan. Personally, I don't really see what the big deal is over a 1st dan or 1st poom.



I agree. To me 1st Dan/Poom is important because it is hopefully the beginning of deep learning.  After that, maybe 4th Dan because that dan opens the doors to more learning, like instructors course, referee courses, coach courses, etc. and the 4th Dan can apply for dan for their students.  After that, they don't seem as important.


----------



## andyjeffries

puunui said:


> Being around until 4th Dan, you naturally will see teaching perspectives. I do believe that 3rd Dan should assist in teaching responsibilities, such that when they go out on their own, at 4th Dan, they have that experience. It is during the 3rd dan period that the assistant instructor starts thinking about how they will keep this, or change that, or get rid of this in favor of that, etc. Then at 4th Dan, they get to test their own theories out on their own students. When students open their own dojang, I as a general rule give them complete freedom to do and teach however they want. They can always come and ask, but they don't I generally keep my mouth shut and let them figure it out for themselves. Again, I am not into micromanaging or controlling my students. As 4th Dan, they can and should exercise their own freedom and judgment on how to do things. Similarly, when you start your own family, your parents leave you alone and you raise your kids as you see fit. Same thing. Ultimately, the martial arts, and life is about freedom, making choices, learning from those choices, and living with the consequences of those choices.



That's a good point, no one gave me lessons on how to be a father, I just suddenly had kids and had to deal with it.

Interestingly I have a theory that people try to fix the problems in parenting that they perceived they received growing up.  For example, I was bullied as a child and always felt molly-coddled by my mother.  She was doing the best she could (I see that now) but I've always tried to make sure that I'm more "get up, don't be silly" with my kids if the fall over rather than lots of kisses/hugs/etc and I make sure I get time to play fight with both of them (just so they get used to physical contact).  My older brother had a different impression of his upbringing and we've discussed that he's doing a similar counter-reacting.

I wonder if it's the same with new school owners?

I know I'm doing things differently to the way my Master does things (but very similar to the way my Grandmaster, original instructor did them).


----------



## Tez3

andyjeffries said:


> That's a good point, no one gave me lessons on how to be a father, *I just suddenly had kids and had to deal with it.
> 
> *Interestingly I have a theory that people try to fix the problems in parenting that they perceived they received growing up. For example, I was bullied as a child and always felt molly-coddled by my mother. She was doing the best she could (I see that now) but I've always tried to make sure that I'm more "get up, don't be silly" with my kids if the fall over rather than lots of kisses/hugs/etc and I make sure I get time to play fight with both of them (just so they get used to physical contact). My older brother had a different impression of his upbringing and we've discussed that he's doing a similar counter-reacting.
> 
> I wonder if it's the same with new school owners?
> 
> I know I'm doing things differently to the way my Master does things (but very similar to the way my Grandmaster, original instructor did them).




You do know where children come from though?


----------



## SPX

dancingalone said:


> Aikido has strict practice requirements before a student can become eligible to test for a higher rank.  These are the US Aikido Federation guidelines - the USAF is affiliated with the Aikikai Hombu in Japan, and I imagine the requirements are the same there, as it is the world HQ that issues ranks ultimately based on the recommendation of approved instructors.
> 
> 6th kyu      20 days of practice
> 5th Kyu    40 days of practice
> 4th Kyu    80 days of practice after obtaining 5th Kyu
> 3rd Kyu    100 days of practice after obtaining 4th Kyu
> 2nd Kyu    200 days of practice after obtaining 3rd Kyu
> 1st Kyu    300 days of practice after obtaining 2nd Kyu
> 1st Dan    300 days of practice after obtaining 1st Kyu




Assigning "days" seems arbitrary to me.  It should be about hours, not days.  I mean, someone who does "20 days of practice," training one hour a day, has no where near the experience of someone who does 20 days of practice, with 4 hours a day.

Or consider the case of the TKD kickboxer Jerry Trimble.  From what I understand, he received his black belt in one year, by training 6 days a week, 6 hours a day.  Someone else who started training in TKD the same day that Trimble did would have also been training for one year, even though this second guy was only doing two classes a week and not practicing at all on his own.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> I wouldn't. I respect and honor ALL of the knowledge the people that created taekwondo had as it played a role no matter how small, no matter if it is not taught in the main now. It is their complete personal experiences that made them who they are in the first place.


I also respect and honor all of the knowledge of the people that created taekwondo.  I simply would hesitate to call what was done early on 'old school' because I do not feel that it is an accurate description and do not distinguish the two by olds school/new school, but rather by kwan era and unification era.


----------



## dancingalone

SPX said:


> Assigning "days" seems arbitrary to me.  *It should be about hours, not days.*  I mean, someone who does "20 days of practice," training one hour a day, has no where near the experience of someone who does 20 days of practice, with 4 hours a day.



Yeah, probably.  Perhaps as aikido dojo modernize and we all add record-keeping software, the requirements will evolve to tracking hours of floor time.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I also respect and honor all of the knowledge of the people that created taekwondo.  I simply would hesitate to call what was done early on 'old school' because I do not feel that it is an accurate description and do not distinguish the two by olds school/new school, but rather by kwan era and unification era.



Are we perhaps splitting hairs?  I think calling it old school TKD is reasonable enough.  If you prefer kwan-era tkd, that's fine by me too and I will endeavor to remember to use it in the future.  Whatever gets the point across...


----------



## dancingalone

puunui said:


> Do you plan at some point to have your students compete at aau or usat tournaments? if there were a kukkiwon poomsae seminar or usat sparring clinic given in your area, would you consider attending?



I do not plan to field a tournament team at this time.  It's not my area of expertise and I have other projects to tend to.  I would have no objections to my students doing so but I would need to refer them to other resources for instruction.

As far as attending KKW seminars or learning opportunities, I am not against the idea.  I would seriously consider attending a FIC should my schedule permit it.


----------



## puunui

andyjeffries said:


> That's a good point, no one gave me lessons on how to be a father, I just suddenly had kids and had to deal with it. Interestingly I have a theory that people try to fix the problems in parenting that they perceived they received growing up.



Of course everyone does that to a certain degree. People remember the negative aspects and try to not perpetuate the cycle so to speak, only to realize perhaps later why  their parents or teachers they did what they did. The openly critical phase tends to happen at two specific periods on the journey, at 1st Dan, when students feel they have "arrived", and at late 3rd, newly minted 4th Dan, when they venture on their own and are perhaps the most critical of their instructor and their methods or most needing to make a break from their teachers and become their own person, so to speak. I can almost always tell what level someone is when they are out there voicing brashly how their teachers or seniors are "wrong". Invariably, it is either 1st Dans or 4th Dans, at least in taekwondo. Some never grow out of these phases, which is unfortunate. 

By the way, on the issue of constant and never ending learning or improvement, I personally do not think that the learning ever ends, that there are always lessons to be learned. One of the things that this new change in leadership at USAT will bring is more opportunities for seniors to continue their learning, into the philosophical or policy making areas of the journey. The seniors, like those 1st or 4th Dans, also have their own ideas on how to improve things at a national or international level, and they finally get the chance to give their ideas a try.


----------



## dancingalone

mastercole said:


> G
> Myself, I don't know if I would call their standards high, I think I would call them strict.  To me, a high standard would be a correctness of technique, compared to a standard, and back then, especially in the USA, most everyone, Korean and non-Korean lacked correctness of standard.  In earlier cases, the standard was still being set, so it was whatever goes.  Being strict was adhering to "whatever goes" at the time.



It has been years but what I recalled of their technique would not look out of place in any dojo/dojang I have trained in.  Crisp basics, visible speed and power.


----------



## mastercole

andyjeffries said:


> Out of interest, do the senior masters/grandmasters on here specifically put effort in to teaching their Dan level students how to teach?  At what grade does this take place and in what form?  Or do you just give them a nudge when they get to 4th Dan with no real teaching experience in to running their own club?



My most senior student happens to be a South Korean citizen. He is now 7th Dan, not that Dan matters at all, but he owns his own dojang now for more than 10 years.  Before he started training with me, he trained with his father in Shipalki. His family says they are cousins of GM CHUN Sang Sup, founder of Jidokwan.  During training he would naturally help out students in class. I noticed that he had excellent teaching skills in addition to excellent martial arts skills.  So it was natural, I opened a dojang in a near by town and literally gave him the school once it was up and running for about a year. He teaches at that same school today and it is his full time occupation.

I don't really have a set curriculum for training instructors.  That said, I have been involved in instructor training for over a decade. I bring in elite level practitioners (Taekwondo & Taekkyon) to my school and invited other instructors from around the USA to come train and learn from them.  I took 10 Americans to the 1st Kukkiwon Foreign Instructor's Course in Korea. I have sent instructors from my school, and other schools, off to other locations to learn, even to other nations. I'm probably more focused on helping instructors from other schools develop more than I am bring up instructors from my own school, who all tend to have other careers they do not intend on leaving.


----------



## andyjeffries

Tez3 said:


> You do know where children come from though?



Yes, but that's a visual I'm trying desperately to forget!! ;-)


----------



## andyjeffries

SPX said:


> Assigning "days" seems arbitrary to me.  It should be about hours, not days.  I mean, someone who does "20 days of practice," training one hour a day, has no where near the experience of someone who does 20 days of practice, with 4 hours a day.



To paraphrase an expression I know someone on here uses - have they had 20 days of practice or 1 day of practice repeated 20 times.  Even two people in different dojo doing 20 days will have completely different experiences depending on their own attitude/ability, the quality of their training partners, the quality of their instructor. This is my issue with assigning arbitrary times like this.


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> I wouldn't.  I respect and honor ALL of the knowledge the people that created taekwondo had as it played a role no matter how small, no matter if it is not taught in the main now.  It is their complete personal experiences that made them who they are in the first place.



Thinking about it, I do believe that judo did play a part in taekwondo's development, the idea or philosophy of actual contact and sparring being a primary method for developing techniques. The strongest school for sparring competition in the beginning, the Jidokwan, had the strongest judo roots.


----------



## Tez3

andyjeffries said:


> Yes, but that's a visual I'm trying desperately to forget!! ;-)



Er I did mean the begetting of them as opposed to the hatching bit lol, you won't be watching 'Fetch the Midwife' on Sundays them!


Interestingly, that programme is set in the 1950's when childhood was shorter than it is now, when even 5 years olds had responsibilities that people would consider almost child abuse now.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> No, it's not.


While I am certainly open to changing my perspective, nothing that you present in this post is particularly compelling.  



dancingalone said:


> Although competing is encouraged, many ATA students don't attend tournaments at all.


And if they ever decide to, they will have a rank and be bracketed accordingly.  Convenient.



dancingalone said:


> Like with most martial arts schools today, TKD or not, ATA or not, the belt rank is used to designate knowledge of curriculum and there is a certain connotation of proficiency attached as well.


Sure, they're used for that too.  I said primary use, not _only_ use.



dancingalone said:


> I really wonder how that idea is so proliferate in your perspective.


And I really wonder how that idea is so absent from _your_ perspective.



dancingalone said:


> The school I purchased follows KKW guidelines.  They don't compete at all in AAU or USAT tournaments.  The belts are there to represent progression in the curriculum and in taekwondo in general.


Your choice as a school owner is fine and I have no criticism of it whatsoever. 

But you are using it as support for your argument.  While I am very happy for you in your purchase of the school (I hope it does well!!), I do not feel that it strengthens your arguement.

As I said, I am open to changing my perspective, but nothing that you have said thus far has been particularly compelling.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> Are we perhaps splitting hairs?  I think calling it old school TKD is reasonable enough.  If you prefer kwan-era tkd, that's fine by me too and I will endeavor to remember to use it in the future.  Whatever gets the point across...


Not splitting hairs; I just wasn't sure if you were thinking that I wasn't classifying kwan era/old school TKD as TKD.  Sometimes I am not sure how well I am coming across and I simply wanted to avoid misunderstanding.

I don't have any criticism of you calling it old school; I simply don't call it that.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> While I am certainly open to changing my perspective, nothing that you present in this post is particularly compelling.



Is it because you have ignored a few of the points I have made?  It might be useful to restate what you said in my own words so we can verify the source of our argument.

You have noted repeatedly the origins of the dan system in judo as a means of placing competitors into similar levels of ability for sporting purposes.  You apply this extremely broadly, going so far as to state that you would "remind you that martial training has nothing to do with belts. Belts are for sports."

Yet this even upon a cursory review can't stand.

I have noted on several occasions in this thread and elsewhere that there are plenty of examples of martial arts that have adopted a dan rank system, yet their implementation of dans have NOTHING to do with competition.  Mainline aikido is a great example of this where there is simply no concept of tournament competition.  You can also look to a few lines of Chinese systems (the local Hung Gar teacher in my area for example) that likewise have added belts to conform to the public expectation of them, but not as a competitive vehicle for his students.
You emphatically claim that competition is the primary reason for belts.  In so doing, you've left behind arguably the majority of the taekwondoin out there who don't compete, much less the even larger numbers of martial artists in other disciplines who likewise may not compete.  I submit that the belt system means something else to them as taught to them by their own teachers and it's likely has nothing to do with tournaments or competition at all.
You then specifically make the same claim to ATA taekwondo belts.  Even though I believe you said elsewhere that you have no actual experience with Songahm taekwondo.  Even though I've alluded to the fact that there is a certain mythos attached to belt colors and ranks in the ATA along with a connotation of skills proficiency.  I even mentioned the rank of brown belt defined in the ATA is where 'the tree has taken root' and that it is a symbol that the student has 'mastered the basics'.
Meanwhile a handful of taekwondo experts here on MT have said previously that competition sparring is only one part of TKD, that the full range of TKD encompasses much, much more.  Given that sentiment, are we to truly believe that the belt ranking system, one of the key parts to defining junior/senior relationships, is PRIMARILY meant for sports bracketing?  Really?



Daniel Sullivan said:


> And if they ever decide to, they will have a rank and be bracketed accordingly.  Convenient.



And if they never compete, their belt will still have the meanings attached to them taught to them by their teacher and their grandmaster.  They don't need the added convenience of tournament bracketing to validate their existence.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Sure, they're used for that too.  I said primary use, not _only_ use.



Primary use is very, very debatable.  



Daniel Sullivan said:


> And I really wonder how that idea is so absent from _your_ perspective.



Probably because the idea is very foreign to the martial arts I practice.  I've already discussed aikido.  Likewise with my brand of Goju-ryu karate which is anything but sport-focused.  Even the TKD black belts I hold had nothing to do with tournament placement at all, although certainly when I attended open tournaments, that came into play.  My TKD black belt at the dojang I earned it in meant I was a guy with some skills and also some toughness to back it up with.  

So you see, Daniel, I do have to object when a statement is made that the primary reason for belts in the first place is for bracketing.  Not in my experience.  Not in a lot of other people's experience either.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Your choice as a school owner is fine and I have no criticism of it whatsoever.
> 
> But you are using it as support for your argument.  While I am very happy for you in your purchase of the school (I hope it does well!!), I do not feel that it strengthens your arguement.
> 
> As I said, I am open to changing my perspective, but nothing that you have said thus far has been particularly compelling.



Thank you for the well wishes.

I think it strengthens my argument a great deal.  It is a KKW curriculum school that awards colored belts and dan ranks.  Since the school has not and does not compete in tournaments, I must conclude that the usage of belts is similarly to track student progress and to serve as a reward/merit badge as it can with other styles.  Oh, and to establish who is junior, who is senior, too.

Let's put the compelling test upon your shoulders since you assert your premise is true for everyone and every system that has a dan ladder.  How do you answer?


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Given that taekwondo has been codified in pretty much its current form for over forty five years and the founders transitioned from whatever they were doing before to create taekwondo, I would have a hard time calling the early stuff 'old school taekwondo.'  Given that the Kukkiwon does not limit what one teaches to just their curriculum, a modern school could still teach precisely what you describe above with regards to the grappling from judo and maybe some karate forms in addition to the core curriculum and it would be perfectly acceptable.
> 
> 
> Well, after first dan in the Kukkiwon, you learn a few new Korean forms, but when I had trained I learned the vast majority of the technical material in the geub grades.  I continued training and learned Koryo and then was taught keum gang, and ultimately received dojo-dans for my second and third dans, but was never KKW certified and really only consider myself to be an ildan.
> 
> Even though my former GM tasked me with teaching taekwondo, I consider myself unqualified to do so.  Part of the reason that I left was because I was not receiving training anymore; I would show up to train and was handed the class.  The trend seemed to be the same for other students who stayed on much past first dan.  By the time I left, he had twelve year old first and second pums teaching adult classes. Nice kids, and very good practitioners.  But not ready to teach in my opinion.


Daniel, when you say - "Given that taekwondo has been codified in pretty much its current form for over forty five years", what do you see as it's current form? I only ask because if there's one thing Ive started to realise about tkd over the last few years, its that tkd is just such a vague term. I mean, what the kukkiwon does compared to what itf does compared to how my club trains just seems very varied, and the more 'club demos' Im seeing around the place just drives this home further. Im not objecting to your statement, Im just curious as to what you see tkd's current form to be. Or are you speaking soley about kukkiwon tkd?


----------



## Cyriacus

ralphmcpherson said:


> Daniel, when you say - "Given that taekwondo has been codified in pretty much its current form for over forty five years", what do you see as it's current form? I only ask because if there's one thing Ive started to realise about tkd over the last few years, its that tkd is just such a vague term. I mean, what the kukkiwon does compared to what itf does compared to how my club trains just seems very varied, and the more 'club demos' Im seeing around the place just drives this home further. Im not objecting to your statement, Im just curious as to what you see tkd's current form to be. Or are you speaking soley about kukkiwon tkd?


Hehe - Even then, look at how varied KKW TKD can be.










Same Organisation. Extremely different outcomes. Of course, there are surely better examples. But YOU go try and find WTF Beginners (Anything else tends to be Highlight Reels or Best Matches, and so forth) to pick out obvious Training Outcomes from.

The ITF is the same. Heck, Id go so far as to say that just about any MA will have this Trait, no matter what. The outcomes wont be consistent all round.


----------



## mastercole

Cyriacus said:


> Hehe - Even then, look at how varied KKW TKD can be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same Organisation. Extremely different outcomes. Of course, there are surely better examples. But YOU go try and find WTF Beginners (Anything else tends to be Highlight Reels or Best Matches, and so forth) to pick out obvious Training Outcomes from.
> 
> The ITF is the same. Heck, Id go so far as to say that just about any MA will have this Trait, no matter what. The outcomes wont be consistent all round.



I don't follow.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Cyriacus said:


> Hehe - Even then, look at how varied KKW TKD can be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same Organisation. Extremely different outcomes. Of course, there are surely better examples. But YOU go try and find WTF Beginners (Anything else tends to be Highlight Reels or Best Matches, and so forth) to pick out obvious Training Outcomes from.
> 
> The ITF is the same. Heck, Id go so far as to say that just about any MA will have this Trait, no matter what. The outcomes wont be consistent all round.


It was funny, I was looking at a highlights dvd from our club's annual club championships the other day. I was watching the finals of all the sparring divisions and was thinking that if you showed the dvd to someone and then showed them a WTF sparring highlights dvd, there is absolutely no way they would think they were watching the same martial art. Im not saying one is better or worse than the other, just totally different. Yet both are tkd, go figure.


----------



## mastercole

ralphmcpherson said:


> It was funny, I was looking at a highlights dvd from our club's annual club championships the other day. I was watching the finals of all the sparring divisions and was thinking that if you showed the dvd to someone and then showed them a WTF sparring highlights dvd, there is absolutely no way they would think they were watching the same martial art. Im not saying one is better or worse than the other, just totally different. Yet both are tkd, go figure.



That is because there are many types of sparring in Taekwondo.  How many types do you practice?


----------



## SPX

Cyriacus said:


>



Did the ref stop twice to penalize the blue guy?  That's what it looked like. . .  And if so, why?  For winning too much?

Ref:  "Dude, you're getting too many points, so we're taking some away."


----------



## ralphmcpherson

mastercole said:


> That is because there are many types of sparring in Taekwondo.  How many types do you practice?


we do many forms of sparring, depending what we are working on. For example, when working on punching, we may do "punching only" sparring with no kicking. For the championships that particular year we used the wtf rules, but it can vary from year to year. Thats what was so funny about the dvd, we were actually using the same ruleset as wtf, yet it just looked so different.


----------



## msmitht

ralphmcpherson said:


> It was funny, I was looking at a highlights dvd from our club's annual club championships the other day. I was watching the finals of all the sparring divisions and was thinking that if you showed the dvd to someone and then showed them a WTF sparring highlights dvd, there is absolutely no way they would think they were watching the same martial art. Im not saying one is better or worse than the other, just totally different. Yet both are tkd, go figure.


That is because they ARE 2 different martial arts! The tkd that came here between 1960-1980 was mainly itf tkd or, as twin fist would say, shotokan with a bs history behind it(just quoting him) and a heavy emphasis on kicking. Modern day tkd developed in Korea durring the late 1970's and became what we see today in the Olympics/wtf world championships/us open...etc. The differences are so great that most WTF style instructors that I know use the term "Taekwondo" to separate them from "Tae Kwon Do" schools like the ATA/ITF/USTF...etc.


----------



## mastercole

msmitht said:


> That is because they ARE 2 different martial arts! The tkd that came here between 1960-1980 was mainly itf tkd or, as twin fist would say, shotokan with a bs history behind it(just quoting him) and a heavy emphasis on kicking. Modern day tkd developed in Korea durring the late 1970's and became what we see today in the Olympics/wtf world championships/us open...etc. The differences are so great that most WTF style instructors that I know use the term "Taekwondo" to separate them from "Tae Kwon Do" schools like the ATA/ITF/USTF...etc.



The first Taekwondo instructors to open schools in the USA, around 1960 were Henry Cho, who was a Jidokwan practitioner and Jhoon Rhee who was a Chung Do Kwan practitioner. The ITF was not formed in Korea until 1966.  In my state of Ohio, Il Joo Kim opened the first school in 1965, he was from Kang Duk Won. It's a well known fact that the Kwan founders learned either Shotokan, or Shudokan and Shito Ryu. Several also practiced Chaun-fa.  As for the great emphasis on kicking, that came from a natural affinity for kicking, which among some groups of Korean's called Taekkyon. Some of the pioneers told me that they liked to kick, and were aware of Taekkyon, some even saw formal Taekkyon demonstrations (SONG Duk Ki), they naturally added that together with their karate/kungfu. As for the Jidokwan, boxing was a big influence as well.

Most every type of training category that was in early Taekwondo, even from the Kwan era starting in the 1940s, is still there. Not much has really changed. What has happened is that something completely new was added, a unique type of sparring that today is technically called Shihap Kyorugi (aka Olympic sparring) and the modern training methods that developed up around this unique type of sparring.

But many types of sparring remain in Taekwondo, and the Kukkiwon curriculum. That includes punching to the face, sweep/tripping, holds, etc.  However, those early types of sparring were not all out full contact, and had many weaknesses that we solved by the addition of modern training methods.

Shihap Kyorugi did not begin to develop in the late 1970's, it began in the 1940's and had a great acceleration in the 1960's, and progressed by leaps and bounds during each subsequent decade. Today it has become the predominant image of Taekwondo, so much so that some think it is a different Taekwondo. The fact is, it is a new addition, and a very important and genius addition at that.

I do understand the "Taekwondo" and Tae Kwon Do writing difference, it can mean someone who has not learned the Modern Training Methods, or not.


----------



## Cyriacus

mastercole said:


> I don't follow.


TKD is not a preset which will be consistent wherever You look. Even within Organisations. One video is of poor quality Sparring between beginners, the other is decent quality for Beginners. Same Organisation, different outcome.

Read the whole Discussion Good Sir.



ralphmcpherson said:


> It was funny, I was looking at a highlights dvd from our club's annual club championships the other day. I was watching the finals of all the sparring divisions and was thinking that if you showed the dvd to someone and then showed them a WTF sparring highlights dvd, there is absolutely no way they would think they were watching the same martial art. Im not saying one is better or worse than the other, just totally different. Yet both are tkd, go figure.



Yep.
More or less My Idealogy.



SPX said:


> Did the ref stop twice to penalize the blue guy? That's what it looked like. . . And if so, why? For winning too much?
> 
> Ref: "Dude, you're getting too many points, so we're taking some away."



One time (From Memory, the first time) I *THINK* was for Illegal Contact to the Neck. The other one, I dont know.

Ill rewatch it later and try and get back to you, unless the Discussion turns to something else again.


----------



## andyjeffries

Tez3 said:


> Er I did mean the begetting of them as opposed to the hatching bit lol



I know ;-) LOL.  I was just kidding.



Tez3 said:


> you won't be watching 'Fetch the Midwife' on Sundays them! Interestingly, that programme is set in the 1950's when childhood was shorter than it is now, when even 5 years olds had responsibilities that people would consider almost child abuse now.



It wouldn't phase me watching it, but it doesn't seem like the sort of thing I would watch (I rarely watch any programmes set in older times than the 80s, I don't know why but I just tend not to like tv/films set in older times - a rare exception to that is Samurai movies).


----------



## dancingalone

puunui said:


> *It takes about one year to earn a Hapkido 1st dan in Korea,* same as a taekwondo 1st poom/dan. Personally, I don't really see what the big deal is over a 1st dan or 1st poom.



That surprises me.  I believe you have said you studied aikido at one point.  Can you compare the curriculum to what a one year Korean hapkido BB would have learned?  I've always thought hapkido had more or less the same techniques as aikido except with striking added, so the time requirements would closely resemble what aikido does as well.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> Is it because you have ignored a few of the points I have made? It might be useful to restate what you said in my own words so we can verify the source of our argument.
> 
> You have noted repeatedly the origins of the dan system in judo as a means of placing competitors into similar levels of ability for sporting purposes. You apply this extremely broadly, going so far as to state that you would "remind you that *martial training has nothing to do with belts.* Belts are for sports."



Martial training has absolutely nothing to do with belts.  Much of what you say below supports this.  Belts are for holding your clothes together.  

An ascending order of colors applied to the belt is not about martial training either, but works quite well for competition bracketing, offering incentive to students, and as a nice 'at-a-glance' method of knowing who is at what level in the room.  But none of that is related to martial training.  Martial training could be done just as effectively in one's underoos.  Just ask Batman.  



dancingalone said:


> Yet this even upon a cursory review can't stand.
> 
> I have noted on several occasions in this thread and elsewhere that there are plenty of examples of martial arts that have adopted a dan rank system, yet their implementation of dans have NOTHING to do with competition. Mainline aikido is a great example of this where there is simply no concept of tournament competition. You can also look to a few lines of Chinese systems (the local Hung Gar teacher in my area for example) that likewise have added belts to conform to the public expectation of them, but not as a competitive vehicle for his students.
> You emphatically claim that competition is the primary reason for belts. In so doing, you've left behind arguably the majority of the taekwondoin out there who don't compete, much less the even larger numbers of martial artists in other disciplines who likewise may not compete. I submit that the belt system means something else to them as taught to them by their own teachers and it's likely has nothing to do with tournaments or competition at all.
> You then specifically make the same claim to ATA taekwondo belts. Even though I believe you said elsewhere that you have no actual experience with Songahm taekwondo. Even though I've alluded to the fact that there is a certain mythos attached to belt colors and ranks in the ATA along with a connotation of skills proficiency. I even mentioned the rank of brown belt defined in the ATA is where 'the tree has taken root' and that it is a symbol that the student has 'mastered the basics'.
> Meanwhile a handful of taekwondo experts here on MT have said previously that competition sparring is only one part of TKD, that the full range of TKD encompasses much, much more. Given that sentiment, are we to truly believe that the belt ranking system, one of the key parts to defining junior/senior relationships, is PRIMARILY meant for sports bracketing? Really?
> And if they never compete, their belt will still have the meanings attached to them taught to them by their teacher and their grandmaster. They don't need the added convenience of tournament bracketing to validate their existence.


Just to clear one thing up right away: I have *never* made a case for or implied that taekwondo is only about competiton. But you imply that I did in your last bullet point. 

And what makes you say that belts define the junior/senior relationship? They do not. That relationship exists independently of belts. Belts have no part in defining junior/senior relationships. 

None of what you posted above is compelling. Not that it isn't necesarilly _true_, but you seem to feel that I think that by primary that I mean that the *only* use for belts is competition. Either that, or you misunderstand the meaning of primary.

The _primary_ purpose of firearms is to kill either people or animals. Yet, there are plenty of people who are enthusiasts who engage in competition, shoot for enjoyment, or just love guns the way that some people like swords. 

The *only* purpose for a sword is for killing people. You can't even hunt with the darned thing; it is a weapon designed specifically for killing people. And yet, we have sword arts where people never draw the blood of another human being and in some cases, never spar and thus, never even simulate killing another human being. The fact that the sword's prmary, nay, only purpose, is to kill people does not keep sword arts from existing for the purpose of physical and spiritual improvement.

I am talking about the implement (the colored belt system) and its primary intended *purpose*. You are talking about *usage* of the colored belts and about the nature art. And your above statements make that very clear. Now, I agree with most of them, though not at all about how you say belts define relationships, but it is pretty clear that you and I are on two very different wavelengths and I think are talking past each other.



dancingalone said:


> Primary use is very, very debatable.


Obviously: we've debated it over several pages!  



dancingalone said:


> *Probably because the idea is very foreign to the martial arts I practice.* I've already discussed aikido. Likewise with my brand of Goju-ryu karate which is anything but sport-focused. Even the TKD black belts I hold had nothing to do with tournament placement at all, although certainly when I attended open tournaments, that came into play. My TKD black belt at the dojang I earned it in meant I was a guy with some skills and also some toughness to back it up with.


You just implied that you don't practice taekwondo, as competition is not at all foreign to the art. Somehow, I don't think that that is what you meant to say, but taken to its logical conclusion, that is what your statement would mean.



dancingalone said:


> So you see, Daniel, I do have to object when a statement is made that the primary reason for belts in the first place is for bracketing. Not in my experience. Not in a lot of other people's experience either.


You are basing this statement on your experience and that of 'a lot of other people's experience.' I can just as easily respond that it is in *my* experience and in a lot of other people's experience, competiton bracketing is the primary purpose of the colored belt system. It doesn't make either one of us right.



dancingalone said:


> Thank you for the well wishes.


You're welcome!



dancingalone said:


> I think it strengthens my argument a great deal. It is a KKW curriculum school that awards colored belts and dan ranks. Since the school has not and does not compete in tournaments, I must conclude that the usage of belts is similarly to track student progress and to serve as a reward/merit badge as it can with other styles. Oh, and to establish who is junior, who is senior, too.


Again, your conclusions are based on your experience. 'Since the school I purchased has not and does not compete in tournaments, I must conclude...'

There is a lot more to taekwondo than just competition. In fact, I would say that the bulk of the art is not about competition at all. But the art is also not about belts. Without competition, you don't need belts. Yes, one of the purposes for belts is to track student progress and to serve as a reward/merit badge. I have never said otherwise; only that their primary purpose is for competition bracketing. You seem to think that that isn't even on the radar and that competition is "very foreign" to taekwondo. Like it or not, you bought a KKW school. Go go buy the text book. You will find a great deal about competition in it. 

But come on! Do you _really_ believe that belts establish seniority??? Belts _establish_ nothing. Seniority is established through time in grade, maturity, and advancement in the art, none of which has anything to do with what you wear. Koryu arts have no belts, but everyone knows who is senior and who is not. Same for other arts that do not employ a system of visual cues.



dancingalone said:


> Let's put the compelling test upon your shoulders *since you assert your premise is true for everyone and every system *that has a dan ladder. How do you answer?


And I asserted that premise when? I never asserted that my premise is true for every system that has a dan ladder. For starters, I train and teach in a system that has a dan ladder but does not use belts. All of the pictures that I see of aikidoka training are of people with no belts, though I am aware that the system has a dan ladder. How do you conclude that I am applying my premise that "the primary purpose of *the colored belt system* is competion bracketing" to kendo or aikido or other arts that use a dan ladder but do not use belts?

As to how I answer, I have done so in what I have stated in this post. Agree, agree in part, or agree not at all, it pretty much concludes what I have to say on the subject.

My only reason for mentioning it at all is to point out how silly it is for people to get so riled up about who is awarding belts to whom and for what.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Just to clear one thing up right away: I have *never* made a case for or implied that taekwondo is only about competiton.  But you imply that I did in your last bullet point.



I said that you said the primary reason for belts is for sport competition purposes.  I noted in that bullet point that it is accepted by experts that TKD comprises much more than competition.  Therefore it follows that belts as an integral part of TKD, awarded to competitors and NON-competitors alike, must have a meaning or usage entirely unrelated to competitive purposes.  Capish?



Daniel Sullivan said:


> And what makes you say that belts define the junior/senior relationship?  They do not.  That relationship exists independently of belts.  Belts have no part in defining junior/senior relationships.



Read again.  I said they are a *key part* of defining junior/senior relationships.  And they are.  What makes that black belt senior to the white belt that just joined?  It is his greater training and experience which translates into the symbolism tied around his waist.  His black belt automatically gives the white belt the assumption that this is someone the white belt can ask questions of, seek help from.  Like it or not, there is significance there.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> None of what you posted above is compelling.  Not that it isn't necesarilly _true_, but you seem to feel that I think that by primary that I mean that the *only* use for belts is competition.  Either that, or you misunderstand the meaning of primary.



Daniel, if a style has no competition at all and never has from the beginning, how on God's green earth can 'primary' even enter the picture?   If the founder of a style or system has designated specific meanings and usages for the belt ranks, how can you push that aside in favor of 'well, this is how it started in judo' ?   If you never compete as a taekwondoin and your system (ATA) has specific enumerated meanings and import attached to the belt ranks, how can you claim that sport competition nonetheless is the 'primary' reason for ranking belts for him?

'Compelling' arguments has nothing to do with it.  At this point, we're talking about reality.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> The _primary_ purpose of firearms is to kill either people or animals.  Yet, there are plenty of people who are enthusiasts who engage in competition, shoot for enjoyment, or just love guns the way that some people like swords.
> 
> The *only* purpose for a sword is for killing people.  You can't even hunt with the darned thing; it is a weapon designed specifically for killing people.  And yet, we have sword arts where people never draw the blood of another human being and in some cases, never spar and thus, never even simulate killing another human being.  The fact that the sword's prmary, nay, only purpose, is to kill people does not keep sword arts from existing for the purpose of physical and spiritual improvement.



I'm not sure the analogy fits at all.  We're not talking about guns or swords.  We're talking about belt rankings and their purpose in the martial arts.  I have a bo.  I can use it to fight with or I can use it as a decoration for my wall.  What is its primary purpose?  I don't know - I've never been in a real fight using a bo, although much of the time my bo DOES hang on my wall.  Just like guns and swords, bo have little to do with belt rankings either.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> I am talking about the implement and its primary intended *purpose* of the colored belt system.



And you might be right if you were content to confine your comments to judo, particularly in the time frame that Kano Sensei established it.  Other arts and other founders had other ideas when they added a ranking system using colored belts for grade distinction.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> You are talking about the *usage* of belts and about the nature art.  And your above statements make that very clear.  Now, I agree with most of them, though not at all about how you say belts define relationships, but it is pretty clear that  you and I are on two very different wavelengths and I think are talking past each other.



I won't repeat my correction above, but yes it seems like we think quite differently on this topic.





Daniel Sullivan said:


> You just implied that you don't practice taekwondo, as competition is not at all foreign to the art.  Somehow, I don't think that that is what you meant to say, but taken to its logical conclusion, that is what your statement would mean.



No, I did not imply that.  That is an inference you make, based on your mindset.  I said my TKD belts were not awarded to me with a PURPOSE nor USAGE of competition in mind.  The dojang I learned in followed the color meanings established by General Choi.  White = Pure without Knowledge, Yellow = A Seed begins, etc.  And our black belts (brown belts even) had a substantial performance factor attached to them, again with no link to bracketing or seeding or what not.  Their award meant you had demonstrated a good amount of skill in the required curriculum and you had also shown some perseverance in the face of challenge and distress.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> You are basing this statement on your experience and that of 'a lot of other people's experience.'  I can just as easily respond that it is in *my* experience and in a lot of other people's experience, competiton bracketing is the primary purpose of the colored belt system.  It doesn't make either one of us right.



It makes me right for the styles and systems I have expertise in.  I CAN speak for what I actually practice in or what I have good personal knowledge of.  As can you for the styles and systems you practice.  Where they intersect between you and me, I suppose we can argue about it, like below.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Again, your conclusions are based on your experience.  'Since the school I purchased has not and does not compete in tournaments, I must conclude...'



And your conclusion is based upon the often repeated story about how Kano Sensei added the dan system from the game of Go to his refinement of jujutsu...But you're unwilling to consider that other founders of other arts might have had different goals in mind than Kano Sensei when they likewise emulated him.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> There is a lot more to taekwondo than just competition.



True.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> In fact, I would say that the bulk of the art is not about competition at all.



Also true.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> But the art is also not about belts.



Never said it was.  Please re-read instead of putting up a strawman for me to defend against.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Without competition, you don't need belts.  Yes, one of the purposes for belts is to track student progress and to serve as a reward/merit badge.  I have never said otherwise; only that their primary purpose is for competition bracketing.



I have said repeatedly that there are ample styles and systems which have no competitions YET they use belts.  It therefore follows that the PRIMARY purpose of belts for them CANNOT be for competition bracketing.

Please take the time to address this conundrum as this discussion can't really progress until you do. 



Daniel Sullivan said:


> You seem to think that that isn't even on the radar and that competition is "very foreign" to taekwondo.  Like it or not, you bought a KKW school.  Go go buy the text book.  You will find a great deal about competition in it.



This is another strawman I'm afraid.  I said the idea of competition bracketing as the primary rationale for belt rankings was very foreign to the arts I practice, the TKD I learned included.  I did not say competition is foreign to TKD.

And yes I bought a KKW curriculum school.  Location, location, location.  I am enjoying learning the poomsae however.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> But come on!  Do you _really_ believe that belts establish seniority???  Belts _establish_ nothing.  Seniority is established through time in grade, maturity, and advancement in the art, none of which has anything to do with what you wear.  Koryu arts have no belts, but everyone knows who is senior and who is not.  Same for other arts that do not employ a system of visual cues.



Sigh.  I direct you to my response above where I RESTATE above what I actually said about belts and the role (er, key part) they play in defining the junior/senior relationship. 



Daniel Sullivan said:


> And I asserted that premise when?  I never asserted that my premise is true for every system that has a dan ladder.  For starters, I train and teach in a system that has a dan ladder but does not use belts.  All of the pictures that I see of aikidoka training are of people with no belts, though I am aware that the system has a dan ladder.  How do you conclude that I apply my premise that "*belts* are used primarilly for competion bracketing" applied to kendo or aikido or other arts that use a dan ladder but do not use belts?



Ah, finally we get to the meat of it.  If I have misunderstood you all along then I apologize.  If you acknowledge that there are styles and systems that have entirely different meanings attached to their usage of belt ranks than competition bracketing, I can have no quarrel with you.   Yet as I recall you specifically made mention to the ATA as well which although a TKD style still doesn't fit your premise...And Jhoon Rhee TKD as well.

Perhaps to cement the discussion once and for all, let's look at this most excellent post written by mastercole:  http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sh...d-black-belt&p=1459360&highlight=#post1459360 

It is well worth reading multiple times for later reflection, but for brevity's sake I will only quote a small part.



> The various colors of the geup belts represent the various spectrum of  human emotion. The geup holder experiences the spectrum of these  internal obstacles, eventually combining them all, and as when you  combine all primary colors, you get black and black represents the  emptiness of the vast emptiness of the universe (taegeuk). The goal for  color belt experience is black belt understanding.
> 
> The black color of the Dan belt represents the new Dan holders  realization that the new goal is the death of these emotions  (ignorance's, desires, delusion) they identified as a geup holder. The  new Dan holder, who now has basic talent, confronts these internal  obstacles via the pursuit of refinement and excellence. This  confrontation with the self, will take place for many years across many  levels as long as the Dan holder does not give up, eventually the Dan  holder should victor over the self (pil-seung) and no longer be  challenged by these internal obstacles.



Daniel, how do you reconcile this with your contention about the primary purpose of belt ranks?


----------



## Twin Fist

this is exactly right, they really have evolved into 2 different arts.

Tae Kwon Do

and Korean Kickboxing




msmitht said:


> That is because they ARE 2 different martial arts! The tkd that came here between 1960-1980 was mainly itf tkd or, as twin fist would say, shotokan with a bs history behind it(just quoting him) and a heavy emphasis on kicking. Modern day tkd developed in Korea durring the late 1970's and became what we see today in the Olympics/wtf world championships/us open...etc. The differences are so great that most WTF style instructors that I know use the term "Taekwondo" to separate them from "Tae Kwon Do" schools like the ATA/ITF/USTF...etc.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> I said they are a *key part* of defining junior/senior relationships. And they are. What makes that black belt senior to the white belt that just joined? It is his greater training and experience which translates into the symbolism tied around his waist. His black belt automatically gives the white belt the assumption that this is someone the white belt can ask questions of, seek help from. Like it or not, there is significance there.


Belts have no part in defining the relationship. The belt indicates the general rank of another person. But it does not define the relationship, nor it it a key part of it. It may be a part of identifying who is senior to whom, though in a school that does not use stripes on the black belt, the belt can no longer be used reliably for this. 

Identification of who is senior is not a relationship with the senior, which is why I say that belts have no part in defining the relationship. You and I have some kind of relationship: we are both taekwondoin who participate on this board. We have a relationship to Glenn and Master Cole. I have no idea whether or not you are senior to me, though given that you are a taekwondo school owner and I run a kendo school, even if our rank and time in grade is the same, I'd give you the nod. I suspect that we'd both acknowledge Glenn and Master Cole as senior to us. That relationship is defined by our communication with one another and our interractions. Belts are not a part of it.

It seems that we are talking about different things. You seem to be talking about a relationship of proximity within the rank structure, in which case the belts serve as a means to determine who is where in that structure. I am talking about interpersonal relationships. 



dancingalone said:


> *No, I did not imply that.* That is an inference you make, based on your mindset. I said my TKD belts were not awarded to me with a PURPOSE nor USAGE of competition in mind. The dojang I learned in followed the color meanings established by General Choi. White = Pure without Knowledge, Yellow = A Seed begins, etc. And our black belts (brown belts even) had a substantial performance factor attached to them, again with no link to bracketing or seeding or what not. Their award meant you had demonstrated a good amount of skill in the required curriculum and you had also shown some perseverance in the face of challenge and distress.



Okay. What you say now is not what I responded to. If this is what you meant, then fine. 

But this is what I responded to:


dancingalone said:


> *Probably because the idea is very foreign to the martial arts I practice.* I've already discussed aikido. Likewise with my brand of Goju-ryu karate which is anything but sport-focused. Even the TKD black belts I hold had nothing to do with tournament placement at all, although certainly when I attended open tournaments, that came into play. My TKD black belt at the dojang I earned it in meant I was a guy with some skills and also some toughness to back it up with.


No inferrence: I responded to exactly what you typed. Also as before, I have bolded the part that I was responding to.  I left the rest in because I did not want your quote hanging there without the rest of the context.  

You said that competition is "very foreign" to the arts that you practice.  That is a comment about the art itself.  You then went on to describe things about your training and your experiences.  The reason that I bolded the first sentence is that competition is not at all foreign to taekwondo as an art, KKW in particular, which you practice.  Just because it was not a part of what you were taught or the curriculum that you have chosen to teach to your students does not make it foreign to the art.  That is the distinction that I was making. 



dancingalone said:


> Never said it was. Please re-read instead of putting up a strawman for me to defend against.



Never said that you said it was. I was stating my own views and in no way was inferring what I think you had said.



dancingalone said:


> I have said repeatedly that there are ample styles and systems which have no competitions YET they use belts. It therefore follows that the PRIMARY purpose of belts for them CANNOT be for competition bracketing.
> 
> Please take the time to address this conundrum as this discussion can't really progress until you do.


Sure. Hapkido, which I also practice, traditionally either has no competitive element or the competitive element is really a sidebar. But we're not on the hapkido or aikido board. If we were, we probably would not be having this discussion, as those arts utilize belts in a different manner and do not traditionally have a competitive element. 

But taekwondo does have a competitive element, and it is at the arts core, not a sidebar like it is in hapkido. Taekwondo would actually be called 'taekkyeon-do' had the Hanmoon characters existed for it. And taekkyeon is competitive.

I also freely acknowledge that there are taekwondo systems that do not have a competitive element. But these are definitely the minority. The fact that you teach a style that has the element but choose not to engage in it does not change that it has that element. 

As the saying goes, something for everyone. You and your students have found something in KKW TKD that is for you. Which I think is great. 



dancingalone said:


> This is another strawman I'm afraid. I said the idea of competition bracketing as the primary rationale for belt rankings was very foreign to the arts I practice, the TKD I learned included. I did not say competition is foreign to TKD.
> 
> And yes I bought a KKW curriculum school. Location, location, location. I am enjoying learning the poomsae however.


The fact that you focus on pumse and that your taekwondo training did not involve competition does not change that competition is not foreign to taekwondo; you simply do not involve yourself. 

Which is fine. I rather like the idea of an application based TKD curriculum with a strong 'do' element. Belts work very well in symbolism and in maintaining an orderly class.



dancingalone said:


> Ah, finally we get to the meat of it. If I have misunderstood you all along then I apologize. If you acknowledge that there are styles and systems that have entirely different meanings attached to their usage of belt ranks than competition bracketing, I can have no quarrel with you. Yet as I recall you specifically made mention to the ATA as well which although a TKD style still doesn't fit your premise...And Jhoon Rhee TKD as well.


I certainly acknowledge that. I also acknowledge that both competition bracketing and other meanings/usages can exist together in harmony. This is what I think is the case with the ATA. Which is the point that I tried to make with SPX.

The belts in the ATA do the following: 
1. Gather the dobok.
2. Allow for competition bracketing within age/weight/gender divisions.
3. Provide a visual cue as to where in the curriculum the student is as a benefit to both students and instructors.
4. Provide an incentive, particularly to children and teens, who are most likely the bulk of ATA students.
5. Provide a teaching tool of Songahm philosophy through the various meanings attached to each color.

Belts serve primarily in the capacities of 1, 2 & 3. All five year olds wearing a dobok need the belt to gather it just as much as all adults do. The black belt on a five year old means that he or she will not be whomping on yellow belt five year olds in competition. It also places the fice year old into the dan grade material in the class where he or she is training with others of their own age range. 

So unless are an adult who either competes against or trains in a class with five year olds, the idea that a five year old was awarded a black piece of cloth to go with his or her next rank shouldn't make a bit of difference.



dancingalone said:


> Perhaps to cement the discussion once and for all, let's look at this most excellent post written by mastercole: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sh...d-black-belt&p=1459360&highlight=#post1459360
> 
> It is well worth reading multiple times for later reflection, but for brevity's sake I will only quote a small part.
> 
> 
> 
> mastercole said:
> 
> 
> 
> The various colors of the geup belts represent the various spectrum of human emotion. The geup holder experiences the spectrum of these internal obstacles, eventually combining them all, and as when you combine all primary colors, you get black and black represents the emptiness of the vast emptiness of the universe (taegeuk). The goal for color belt experience is black belt understanding.
> 
> The black color of the Dan belt represents the new Dan holders realization that the new goal is the death of these emotions (ignorance's, desires, delusion) they identified as a geup holder. The new Dan holder, who now has basic talent, confronts these internal obstacles via the pursuit of refinement and excellence. This confrontation with the self, will take place for many years across many levels as long as the Dan holder does not give up, eventually the Dan holder should victor over the self (pil-seung) and no longer be challenged by these internal obstacles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel, how do you reconcile this with your contention about the primary purpose of belt ranks?
Click to expand...

I would say that what he states is true and exists in harmony with the purpose of competition bracketing. I consider competition, while not comprising the bulk of the art, to be vital to the essence of the art. If you or others feel differently then that is fine; what is most important is that you are meeting your students' needs and that taekwondo as you practice it is a positive force in your life and the lives of your students.

Competition, however, does provide a vital (though not the only) way to confront the obtacles and challenges. Competition provides a unique set of obstacles and challenges, and not just on a physical level. I think it obvious that Angel Matos' primary failing was that he was unable to overcome the non-physical challenges of competition. Unfortunately, he failed this challenge at the Olympics with all the world watching. 

When I express the idea of competition bracketing being the primary purpose for colors on belts, it is also with the assumption that taekwondo competition is about more than just winning or losing a bout. More than just scoring points. It is about winning as a person, regardless of the outcome of the bout. It is also about experiencing failures that you can now see and work to overcome, which makes you a better person.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

And my apologies for all the edits to my last post!


----------



## puunui

msmitht said:


> That is because they ARE 2 different martial arts! The tkd that came here between 1960-1980 was mainly itf tkd or, as twin fist would say, shotokan with a bs history behind it(just quoting him) and a heavy emphasis on kicking. Modern day tkd developed in Korea durring the late 1970's and became what we see today in the Olympics/wtf world championships/us open...etc.



Modern day taekwondo has been in continuous development since the 1940's. The use of steps and emphasis on roundhouse kick, which is what we see today in the Olympics, WTF World Championships, US Open, etc. was developed in the early1960s in Korea, when tournaments in Korea began using hogu. 




msmitht said:


> The differences are so great that most WTF style instructors that I know use the term "Taekwondo" to separate them from "Tae Kwon Do" schools like the ATA/ITF/USTF...etc.



I am not so sure about that. I know that mastercole and I first brought that issue up and people came out of the woodwork to argue that point, how taekwondo is supposed to be spelled. There are many kukki taekwondojang that still spell it Tae Kwon Do. The Chung Do Kwan dan certificates for example, still use that spelling. When I inquired about that, the seniors just shrugged their shoulders and said that when they think of the word "taekwondo", they see the hangul or han moon characters in their minds, not the english word.


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> That surprises me.  I believe you have said you studied aikido at one point.  Can you compare the curriculum to what a one year Korean hapkido BB would have learned?  I've always thought hapkido had more or less the same techniques as aikido except with striking added, so the time requirements would closely resemble what aikido does as well.



I studied aikido for about a year, when I was a kid, five or six years old. I vaguely remember spending most of the class time rolling and falling. I think hapkido's curriculum is much more involved though than aikido's, with many more techniques than aikido. Hapkido certainly is not aikido with striking added. So I think that using aikido's thinking and methodology, it would probably take even longer to earn a hapkido 1st dan. But even with that, in korea, it takes one year to earn a hapkido 1st dan.


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> I think it strengthens my argument a great deal.  It is a KKW curriculum school that awards colored belts and dan ranks.  Since the school has not and does not compete in tournaments, I must conclude that the usage of belts is similarly to track student progress and to serve as a reward/merit badge as it can with other styles.  Oh, and to establish who is junior, who is senior, too.



I can understand at the colored belt levels or even at the dojang level, the belt system is a fairly accurate indicator of seniority. In general, the higher the belt, the longer the student has been studying. The belt rank indicator tends to lose its accuracy outside of the dojang though. There are many out there who I outrank on paper but who I acknowledge and respect as my senior. In fact, I have helped and am trying to help my seniors who have not had opportunities to advance to get rank that is more appropriate to their place on the journey. mastercole does the same thing.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

puunui said:


> But even with that, in korea, it takes one year to earn a hapkido 1st dan.



How many days per week/hours per day?  Thank you.


----------



## puunui

mastercole said:


> Shihap Kyorugi did not begin to develop in the late 1970's, it began in the 1940's and had a great acceleration in the 1960's, and progressed by leaps and bounds during each subsequent decade.



Right. Even back in the 1940s for example, sliding side kick (now known as Cut Kick) was being developed and used by GM UHM Woon Kyu at the Chung Do Kwan. He was nailing everyone with that, so much so that everyone copied him and the Side Kick became one of the Chung Do Kwan's signature techniques. Same thing with back kick and jumpin back kick, which was spin side kick and jump spin side kick back in the 1940s. GM Uhm was busy developing that as well. Today, one cannot be considered a complete competitor without a cut kick, back kick or jump back kick. It is in every competitor's bag of techniques.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Kong Soo Do said:


> How many days per week/hours per day? Thank you.


They walk into the dojang and are faced with two doors.  One says "hapkido" while the other has a picture of Chuck Norris.  The kwanjang looks intently at the student and says, "You have reached a fork in your road of life.  You must choose hapkido or death."  

If the student goes for the door with the picture of Chuck Norris, he has chosen death.

If the student goes through the door that says 'hapkido,' he is shown his pallet on the floor and told when mealtimes are.  He wakes up at five in the morning and trains until seven, at which time breakfast is served.  He then trains until noon when lunch is served.  He trains until five in the evening when dinner is served.  He then trains until eight, at which point all students then gather before the shrine and meditate on things hapkido.  At nine, they go to bed.  The cycle then repeats at five the next day.  Only on Sunday are the students allowed to rest.  This is because the kwanjang knows that the wait time at the golf course is shorter on Sunday.  This goes on for a year, at which point the student is a hardened billet of Korean martial muscle.  If he came to the dojang as a different nationality, he is Korean by the end of the year.

Either that...

Or probably two to four classes a week plus some practice in between.  Likely not much different than here, given that Koreans go to school and have jobs and lives just as we do here.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Belts have no part in defining the relationship....



Thanks for the answer.  I will try to reply later tonight.  I have a few errands to run this afternoon along with classes to teach....


----------



## puunui

mastercole said:


> When I was in Europe with GM Dae Sung Lee of Hawaii he asked to follow me through Bassai-dai, he always liked that form and also wanted to teach it to his students. GM Lee was a very good fighter and he is also excellent at forms. He figured Bassai-dai out in a day, and the next day he was performing it amazing, like he has done it for 30 years.



People forget that GM Dae Sung Lee was also ten time national champion in poomsae at USTU Nationals. He can do it all.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Cool.  Talk to you then!


----------



## dancingalone

puunui said:


> I can understand at the colored belt levels or even at the dojang level, the belt system is a fairly accurate indicator of seniority. In general, the higher the belt, the longer the student has been studying.



Agreed.



puunui said:


> The belt rank indicator tends to lose its accuracy outside of the dojang though. There are many out there who I outrank on paper but who I acknowledge and respect as my senior. In fact, I have helped and am trying to help my seniors who have not had opportunities to advance to get rank that is more appropriate to their place on the journey. mastercole does the same thing.



I also agree for the most part.  The correlation of rank to experience and knowledge level is only as consistent as the people awarding the rank and the people practicing the martial art.  For the most part, it works well within the extended family of schools run by students of my sensei like me.  I see little variation in the quality of karate-ka produced by other first generation students of my teacher.  I imagine the same consistency won't be possible 2-3 generations down the line.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Daniel Sullivan said:


> They walk into the dojang and are faced with two doors.  One says "hapkido" while the other has a picture of Chuck Norris.  The kwanjang looks intently at the student and says, "You have reached a fork in your road of life.  You must choose hapkido or death."
> 
> If the student goes for the door with the picture of Chuck Norris, he has chosen death.
> 
> If the student goes through the door that says 'hapkido,' he is shown his pallet on the floor and told when mealtimes are.  He wakes up at five in the morning and trains until seven, at which time breakfast is served.  He then trains until noon when lunch is served.  He trains until five in the evening when dinner is served.  He then trains until eight, at which point all students then gather before the shrine and meditate on things hapkido.  At nine, they go to bed.  The cycle then repeats at five the next day.  Only on Sunday are the students allowed to rest.  This is because the kwanjang knows that the wait time at the golf course is shorter on Sunday.  This goes on for a year, at which point the student is a hardened billet of Korean martial muscle.  If he came to the dojang as a different nationality, he is Korean by the end of the year.
> 
> Either that...
> 
> Or probably two to four classes a week plus some practice in between.  Likely not much different than here, given that Koreans go to school and have jobs and lives just as we do here.



Oddly enough, I remember reading an article in the JAMA about Muay Thai and it was very similar to what you've described....except the part about Chuck Norris :ultracool  (that would be Ninja training.  Not that the Ninjas grows up to be like Chuck Norris...they only grow up to be killed by Chuck Norris).


----------



## puunui

mastercole said:


> What they have related to me is this.  Being awarded Dan, whether it be via hard work, good skill, dedication, contribution, allied support or a combination of those things, means that one is now accepted into Taekwondo as a member.  What Dan level a person is awarded is generally based on to what degree a Dan holder has endeavored in these mentioned pursuits and highers levels of Dan are used to encourage the Dan holder into deeper, extended pursuit.



Exactly. With each higher dan received comes an unspoken instruction and/or encouragement to take it even higher, to do more, to be more, so you can continue to have your teacher look at you with the same approving, admiring eyes when they gave you the last promotion, proud that you are their student, that you are out there doing something for the betterment of the martial art that you study. Dan promotions are a license and edict to excel. Your measure your contributions in this way: Is taekwondo better because of your participation? Or do you do more harm than good?


----------



## dancingalone

puunui said:


> I studied aikido for about a year, when I was a kid, five or six years old. I vaguely remember spending most of the class time rolling and falling. I think hapkido's curriculum is much more involved though than aikido's, with many more techniques than aikido. Hapkido certainly is not aikido with striking added. So I think that using aikido's thinking and methodology, it would probably take even longer to earn a hapkido 1st dan. But even with that, in korea, it takes one year to earn a hapkido 1st dan.



Well...  I've compared techniques with people from GM JR West's group and the general number of variations of locks and holds is actually less than what I practice in Aikikai,  up to 2nd dan at least.  Not sure what happens after that - maybe they have a lot of stuff on the back end.  Where they have more material 'officially' in the requirements is with the striking obviously and throws.

As for time to BB in hapkido - again the hapkido requirements I know about here requires substantially more time than 1 year, but that's OK.  It's hard to compare without a line by line matrix of what is taught where along with what level of proficiency is required.

Thank you for the reply.


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> Well...  I've compared techniques with people from GM JR West's group and the general number of variations of locks and holds is actually less than what I practice in Aikikai,  up to 2nd dan at least.  Not sure what happens after that - maybe they have a lot of stuff on the back end.  Where they have more material 'officially' in the requirements is with the striking obviously and throws.



One of my hapkido seniors who used to teach parts of those seminars that GM West throws said that GM West's curriculum is somewhat abbreviated from say, the Daehan Hapkido curriculum. This is especially true in the kick department. I don't have any first hand experience myself with GM West's curriculum, but that is what was told to me. I do believe that GM West earned his Hapkido 1st Dan in Vietnam in about one year.


----------



## mastercole

puunui said:


> Right. Even back in the 1940s for example, sliding side kick (now known as Cut Kick) was being developed and used by GM UHM Woon Kyu at the Chung Do Kwan. He was nailing everyone with that, so much so that everyone copied him and the Side Kick became one of the Chung Do Kwan's signature techniques. Same thing with back kick and jumpin back kick, which was spin side kick and jump spin side kick back in the 1940s. GM Uhm was busy developing that as well. Today, one cannot be considered a complete competitor without a cut kick, back kick or jump back kick. It is in every competitor's bag of techniques.



I heard that too, from other seniors. GM Uhm was a very driven man and had high expectations for everyone. Korean team members from the 70's and 80's told me that if you lost a game, GM Uhm was the last person you, or your coach wanted to see.


----------



## puunui

mastercole said:


> I heard that too, from other seniors. GM Uhm was a very driven man and had high expectations for everyone.



I sometimes wonder how taekwondo would be today without Dr. KIM Un Yong, GM LEE Chong Woo and GM UHM Woon Kyu leading the way.


----------



## IcemanSK

puunui said:


> I sometimes wonder how taekwondo would be today without Dr. KIM Un Yong, GM LEE Chong Woo and GM UHM Woon Kyu leading the way.



I'd like to hear more of what you mean by this. How do you it would be different?


----------



## puunui

IcemanSK said:


> I'd like to hear more of what you mean by this. How do you it would be different?




If those three gentlemen were not involved, in my opinion, we wouldn't have taekwondo as we know it today. it would be something else. i have no idea what though.


----------



## dancingalone

puunui said:


> One of my hapkido seniors who used to teach parts of those seminars that GM West throws said that GM West's curriculum is somewhat abbreviated from say, the Daehan Hapkido curriculum. This is especially true in the kick department. I don't have any first hand experience myself with GM West's curriculum, but that is what was told to me. I do believe that GM West earned his Hapkido 1st Dan in Vietnam in about one year.



There's a decent amount of judo embedded from what I have observed, seeing what the local guys practice first hand.  I enjoyed working out with them and I think their stuff is solid.


----------



## dancingalone

First, sorry for the extended delay in response...



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Belts have no part in defining the relationship. The belt indicates the general rank of another person. But it does not define the relationship, nor it it a key part of it. It may be a part of identifying who is senior to whom, though in a school that does not use stripes on the black belt, the belt can no longer be used reliably for this.
> 
> Identification of who is senior is not a relationship with the senior, which is why I say that belts have no part in defining the relationship. You and I have some kind of relationship: we are both taekwondoin who participate on this board. We have a relationship to Glenn and Master Cole. I have no idea whether or not you are senior to me, though given that you are a taekwondo school owner and I run a kendo school, even if our rank and time in grade is the same, I'd give you the nod. I suspect that we'd both acknowledge Glenn and Master Cole as senior to us. That relationship is defined by our communication with one another and our interractions. Belts are not a part of it.



Within singular dojang, it absolutely does.  The yudanja line in the front do they not?  On a practical level, this custom lets the juniors in the back observe the superior technique of their seniors, so they can emulate and learn from them.  If you are addressing some deeper meaning of junior and senior such as formal mentorship, that is not what I referred to above in this thread.  It's far too easy to poke holes once you start discussing things on that level obviously. 



Daniel Sullivan said:


> It seems that we are talking about different things. You seem to be talking about a relationship of proximity within the rank structure, in which case the belts serve as a means to determine who is where in that structure. I am talking about interpersonal relationships.



Yep.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Okay. What you say now is not what I responded to. If this is what you meant, then fine.
> 
> But this is what I responded to:
> 
> No inferrence: I responded to exactly what you typed. Also as before, I have bolded the part that I was responding to.  I left the rest in because I did not want your quote hanging there without the rest of the context.
> 
> You said that competition is "very foreign" to the arts that you practice.  That is a comment about the art itself.  You then went on to describe things about your training and your experiences.  The reason that I bolded the first sentence is that competition is not at all foreign to taekwondo as an art, KKW in particular, which you practice.  Just because it was not a part of what you were taught or the curriculum that you have chosen to teach to your students does not make it foreign to the art.  That is the distinction that I was making.
> 
> Sure. Hapkido, which I also practice, traditionally either has no competitive element or the competitive element is really a sidebar. But we're not on the hapkido or aikido board. If we were, we probably would not be having this discussion, as those arts utilize belts in a different manner and do not traditionally have a competitive element.



Well, to me it seemed as you seized on the first sentence in the paragraph without considering that the 4th sentence on (the parts specifically about TKD) was most relevant to the discussion if we want to talk about TKD.  So to recap, you acknowledge that the contention you make about belts = primarily for competition bracketing is NOT germane at all to systems like aikido or hapkido.  That is good although I do wish you'd acknowledged this point a lot sooner, glancing through several of my responses on this exact point.  Also, it's not a big step from then to consider the same for tae kwon do.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> But taekwondo does have a competitive element, and it is at the arts core, not a sidebar like it is in hapkido. Taekwondo would actually be called 'taekkyeon-do' had the Hanmoon characters existed for it. And taekkyeon is competitive.



With all due respect to taekkyon and those involved in its rebirth, I'd prefer to not converge the subject with this one. 

As for TKD having a competitive element, that's is undoubtedly true.  However, that does not inevitably lead to the conclusion that within TKD, belts are primarily for the convenience of holding tournaments or competitions.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> I also freely acknowledge that there are taekwondo systems that do not have a competitive element. But these are definitely the minority. The fact that you teach a style that has the element but choose not to engage in it does not change that it has that element.



You're a smart fellow, Daniel.  Can you re-read what I wrote above and tell me where I said that I teach a TKD that does NOT included competition?  I SAID the style of TKD that I earned my black belts in previously did NOT regard competition bracketing as the primary purpose for using belts to begin with.  I SAID we followed the colored belt meanings outlined by General Choi.  I SAID my black belt meant I have learned a certain amount of requirements and had displayed both skill and toughness along the way.   

This is a far cry from "fact that you teach a style that has the element but choose not to engage in it does not change that it has that element".  Not sure how you could have jumped to that conclusion based on what I wrote.  I even mentioned that I attended open tournaments within that same paragraph!



Daniel Sullivan said:


> As the saying goes, something for everyone. You and your students have found something in KKW TKD that is for you. Which I think is great.



I think it would be great if you'd quit misreading/mis-inferring what you think I said.  I like you, Daniel, but the above sentence comes across as quite patronizing, and yes, I know you didn't mean it that way.  Nonetheless...

I said the KKW curriculum school I bought does not attend USAT or AAU tournaments but they still use the belt system.  Accordingly there must be some other purpose for belts other than competition bracketing.  This a far cry from implying if not saying outright that there is no competitive element within the school.  We spar each other at the very least and there are surely other 'competitive' activities which are designed to stress the students. 



Daniel Sullivan said:


> The fact that you focus on pumse and that your taekwondo training did not involve competition does not change that competition is not foreign to taekwondo; you simply do not involve yourself.



Yeah, I am not sure how you conclude I focus on poomsae either based on what I wrote here.  I said I am enjoying learning the KKW poomsae,not that I necessarily focus on them.  I do think forms in general are very, very important, but that's always been based on a belief in form applications as a method of teaching practical fighting theories and usages, not as some pure aesthetic.

And *cough*  read what I wrote again - I attended plenty of tournaments in my TKD days with and without my school mates.  It's just that your contention connecting belts to competition falls way short within my old school, my current school, my niece and nephew's schools, and probably thousands and thousands of other schools out there.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Which is fine. I rather like the idea of an application based TKD curriculum with a strong 'do' element. Belts work very well in symbolism and in maintaining an orderly class.







Daniel Sullivan said:


> I certainly acknowledge that. I also acknowledge that both competition bracketing and other meanings/usages can exist together in harmony. This is what I think is the case with the ATA. Which is the point that I tried to make with SPX.



And that would be a solid thing to say.  Where you err in my opinion is when you want to speak for other people and argue that competition bracketing is the primary reason for the existence of belts.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> The belts in the ATA do the following:
> 1. Gather the dobok.
> 2. Allow for competition bracketing within age/weight/gender divisions.
> 3. Provide a visual cue as to where in the curriculum the student is as a benefit to both students and instructors.
> 4. Provide an incentive, particularly to children and teens, who are most likely the bulk of ATA students.
> 5. Provide a teaching tool of Songahm philosophy through the various meanings attached to each color.



Go ask a Songham expert what order of possible usages in descending importance should be.  I guarantee the competition bracketing, although the ATA obviously has an extensive tournament circuit, will be ranked as less important than other things.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Belts serve primarily in the capacities of 1, 2 & 3. All five year olds wearing a dobok need the belt to gather it just as much as all adults do. The black belt on a five year old means that he or she will not be whomping on yellow belt five year olds in competition. It also places the fice year old into the dan grade material in the class where he or she is training with others of their own age range.



Why does the meaning of the belt change merely because of age?  If the belt system is arguably about something else other than competition, then the age factor is moot.  The ideals promoted by the practice of TKD, Songahm or otherwise, remains whether the taekwondoin is small and young or elderly or infirm.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> So unless are an adult who either competes against or trains in a class with five year olds, the idea that a five year old was awarded a black piece of cloth to go with his or her next rank shouldn't make a bit of difference.



As I said in the ATA (and other TKD systems too) certain meanings are attached to the belts.  It has nothing to do with being a 5 year old, although I admittedly am not fond of awarding kids so young the rank.  Why?  Well back to the brown belt thing.  "Has mastered the basics".  Not saying there aren't rare exceptions since there are, but the kid in the video at the beginning of this thread clearly was nowhere near mastering his basics.  Whatever - I'm not even talking about him at this point.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> I would say that what he states is true and exists in harmony with the purpose of competition bracketing. I consider competition, *while not comprising the bulk of the art*, to be vital to the essence of the art. If you or others feel differently then that is fine; what is most important is that you are meeting your students' needs and that taekwondo as you practice it is a positive force in your life and the lives of your students.
> 
> Competition, however, does provide a vital (though not the only) way to confront the obtacles and challenges. Competition provides a unique set of obstacles and challenges, and not just on a physical level. I think it obvious that Angel Matos' primary failing was that he was unable to overcome the non-physical challenges of competition. Unfortunately, he failed this challenge at the Olympics with all the world watching.
> 
> When I express the idea of competition bracketing being the primary purpose for colors on belts, it is also with the assumption that taekwondo competition is about more than just winning or losing a bout. More than just scoring points. It is about winning as a person, regardless of the outcome of the bout. It is also about experiencing failures that you can now see and work to overcome, which makes you a better person.



If it is not the bulk of the art, then can it be the primary reason for the belt system?  I say no.  And really that is all I am saying.  I dislike the pat argument that the belts came from judo and therefore this or that.  Clearly the world has moved on from Kano Sensei's time.  Like it or not, there is much import attached to the belts within and without TKD, within and without ATA, ITF, KKW, whatever.  It may be one way in one particular style, but it is a mistake to try to generalize the same to another.

As for addressing the idea of black belts and their rigorous or lenient award... let's consider academic degrees or industry-specific certifications.  Is it fair to say that the ones with longer requirements and greater rigor also have the highest levels of prestige and respect?  That doesn't mean that a 1 year BB/poom awarded in one group isn't legitimate.  Clearly it is by the group's internal measures and controls.  Which would you rather have though?  Which would be more respected by a complete non-martial artist? And does it matter at all in the end?

You know what they say about opinions, but I lean towards the rigor side.  And in so doing, guess what?  I'm as much as in the right as those who have opposite beliefs.  No one can invoke the spirit of Kano Sensei, Funakoshi Sensei, etc. to justify their position since the world has moved on and there are attached modern beliefs and meanings, both eastern and western to the belt system at this point.

I hope I have not come across as overly contentious here.  I am passionate about martial arts in general and I have some strong beliefs that I am not shy about expressing.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

You're not at all contentious.  

As for what I said about TKD having something for everyone:  Not meant to be patronizing; kendo is competitive, but not everyone competes.  There is something for everyone there as well.  My point was that TKD is multifaceted enough that there really _is_ something for everyone.

As for the length of time and rigor, yes, a first dan from a school that has higher standards and produces better students will be more respected than one with lower standards, though I don't necessarilly accociate length of time with higher standards.  

I think each program needs to be looked at in its entirety and not judged based only on the length of time as some others on MT do (remarks along the lines of, two year BB = BS, anything less than three years = BS, and at three years you'd better be Chuck Norris, etc.).  But yes, a program that turns out better students will be respected more than one that does not.  Same as university degrees; all bachelors degrees are not considered equal, even if they are technically equal.

As far as the five year old in the video, what reason *other* than competition bracketing would you offer for his having a black belt?  Given that you say that he hasn't become proficient in the basics.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> As for the length of time and rigor, yes, a first dan from a school that has higher standards and produces better students will be more respected than one with lower standards, though I don't necessarilly accociate length of time with higher standards.



Length of time allows you to add mental and emotional maturity to the evaluative process.  This can be relevant if the belt is about more than physical skills. 



Daniel Sullivan said:


> I think each program needs to be looked at in its entirety and not judged based only on the length of time as some others on MT do (remarks along the lines of, two year BB = BS, anything less than three years = BS, and at three years you'd better be Chuck Norris, etc.).  But yes, a program that turns out better students will be respected more than one that does not.  Same as university degrees; all bachelors degrees are not considered equal, even if they are technically equal.



I agree.  



Daniel Sullivan said:


> As far as the five year old in the video, what reason *other* than competition bracketing would you offer for his having a black belt?  Given that you say that he hasn't become proficient in the basics.



If you are asking for my guess, I would say his instructors have used the belt progression path in his case as an attendance marker and personal motivator/reward system.  By their own admission, his black belt means he has improved from a personal benchmark and they are not necessarily comparing him to his peers or to an overall performance guideline - a mistake in my opinion.

He is ATA, so there should have be certain signposts to guide his development.  Some selected items follow...

Orange - student sees beginnings of TKD but has no power
Camo - student starts sparring
Green - is developing power 
Brown - has mastered the basics
Red - Physical skill has been achieved and student is now working on physical and mental discipline
Black - the student has mastered the previous levels of development and they have all combined to produce black


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> There's a decent amount of judo embedded from what I have observed, seeing what the local guys practice first hand.



That might be Dr. He Young Kimm's influence. Judo was Dr. Kimm's first art, and I believe, first love. When he visited me, and I showed him my book rooms, he went straight for two bookcases, the one on judo and the one on hapkido, pretty much ignoring the rest. 




dancingalone said:


> I enjoyed working out with them and I think their stuff is solid.



That's good. You might want to attend one of those semi annual seminars in MS, if they still have them.


----------



## TaekwonPRO

The ATA is partially why having a blackbelt means nothing anymore.

Not that it should have in the first place. It's just a piece of cloth.


----------



## miguksaram

puunui said:


> That's good. You might want to attend one of those semi annual seminars in MS, if they still have them.


They still have them.  I get an evite on Facebook for them all the time.


----------



## RonMarlow

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/br...l-cnsp-digestbr-0311-20120311,0,6430374.story


----------



## clfsean

Oh yay... Another one....

Sent from my Thunderbolt on Tapatalk. Excuse the auto-correct spelling errors.


----------



## Cyriacus

Dear Me. Is the Thread gonna kickstart again?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

RonMarlow said:


> http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/br...l-cnsp-digestbr-0311-20120311,0,6430374.story


Looks like the kid did well in competition.  And he's up doing exercise for twenty or more hours per week instead of playing X-Box.  He looks happy too!  Congrats to him on his BB.


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Looks like the kid did well in competition.  And he's up doing exercise for twenty or more hours per week instead of playing X-Box.  He looks happy too!  Congrats to him on his BB.



I thought you were against child black belts.


----------



## terryl965

Look I just want to say this about childern in general, with all the video games teaching chi balls technique and all and how to fly from tree branches and rooftops we do not need schools anymore. Toy R Us has brought back the Black Belt in a box kit for only $29.95 plus tax. That is the way to get a BB nowadays.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

puunui said:


> I thought you were against child black belts.


I was, and still am not overly favorable to the idea, at least in practice; in theory, I have no problem with it.  

The reason that I say that 'I _was_' is because for years, I felt that it was doing the kids a disservice due to the perception of what a black belt is.  But having been around enough kids with black belts (my old GM issued them to kids along with their pum certificates and I have numerous friends who have children with black belts from different schools), I found that little kids with black belts don't think that they can beat up adult attackers and are not being brainwashed into thinking that they're Chuck Norris or Dolph Lundgren.  And the parents are aware that their kids are not invincible fighting machines, so nobody is being duped.

In short, I found that the facts did not match my perception.  Or perhaps my perception was correct ten to twenty years ago but no longer is.  Either way I had to adjust my opinion based upon first hand observation.

I am against it in a KKW school because I feel that the instructor is issuing the incorrect belt for the grade.  But it I don't run a KKW school and I'm not paying those school owner's bills for them.  If they're running a positive program and the kids and parents are happy, and they aren't using kiddie BBs as a way to gouge parents out of hundreds of dollars, then I have no criticism.


----------



## Cyriacus

terryl965 said:


> Look I just want to say this about childern in general, with all the video games teaching chi balls technique and all and how to fly from tree branches and rooftops we do not need schools anymore. Toy R Us has brought back the Black Belt in a box kit for only $29.95 plus tax. That is the way to get a BB nowadays.


OOH! Can I get one with a Gold Stripe on it for an extra $5.99?


----------



## miguksaram

I posted this in another thread by accident....Please read prior to getting worked up about some kid's black belt promotion:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/karate-lessons-give-child-selfconfidence-to-quit-k,2297/


----------



## lifespantkd

Daniel Sullivan said:


> In short, I found that the facts did not match my perception.  Or perhaps my perception was correct ten to twenty years ago but no longer is.  Either way I had to adjust my opinion based upon first hand observation.



Well said and well done. And, I'm not really talking about the topic at hand. I'm talking about your choice to remain open and to reconsider an opinion because of changing, new, or different information that you had not encountered before. That is a wise approach regardless of the topic.

Cynthia


----------



## Twin Fist

TaekwonPRO said:


> The ATA is partially why having a blackbelt means nothing anymore.



this. Has anyone else noticed that almost all of these stories come from ATA schools?


----------



## andyjeffries

miguksaram said:


> I posted this in another thread by accident....Please read prior to getting worked up about some kid's black belt promotion:
> http://www.theonion.com/articles/karate-lessons-give-child-selfconfidence-to-quit-k,2297/



That's very funny. The Onion does it again


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Twin Fist said:


> TaekwonPRO said:
> 
> 
> 
> The ATA is partially why having a blackbelt means nothing anymore.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this.
Click to expand...

...is incorrect in my opinion.  

The black belt means exactly what it has always meant; that the student meet minimum requirements of knowledge and proficiency as judged by the examiner at the school where it was issued and that the student may compete with other black belts within that student's gender, age, and weight categories at organizational and at open events.  



Twin Fist said:


> Has anyone else noticed that almost all of these stories come from ATA schools?


Yes, I have noticed.  

Its the ATA.  I don't practice Songahm taekwondo and am not affiliated with the ATA, so how they structure their belt colors with regards to age and material is up to them.  At least they have a seemingly consistent definition of what constitutes a "black belt."  ATA or no, since the rest of us can't seem to get it together to have a common standard within the same art or similar group of arts, we have no place to complain.  Let them do what they do while the rest of us do what we do.  Everybody wins.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> ...is incorrect in my opinion.  I don't practice Songahm taekwondo and am not affiliated with the ATA, so how they structure their belt colors with regards to age and material is up to them.  At least they have a seemingly consistent definition of what constitutes a "black belt."



Their setup is actually very much like the KKW's.  They have a set list of minimum technical requirements to be awarded 1BD.  There is nothing to prevent individual school operators from adding more content if they want however.

There is no minimum age for black belt in the ATA and no poom belt either.  A BB is a BB in ATA.  Master level and higher candidates must test at the Nationals/Worlds, which is a nice quality control measure.  (I have heard of people failing at that level.)  

There are differing opinions about 5 year old BBs even within the organization.  A minority number would add a minimum age requirement if they got their way, but that is unlikely to ever happen IMO.  I don't think the org rules would prohibit a school operator from imposing his own rule though.

There ARE minimum age requirements for some of their collar colors which denote various levels of instructorship certification.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> Their setup is actually very much like the KKW's. They have a set list of minimum technical requirements to be awarded 1BD. There is nothing to prevent individual school operators from adding more content if they want however.


Is the idea of what a black belt is more universal between ATA practitioners?  

In the US, there is, as we see on this board, a great deal of variance with regards to what a first dan should be capable of, regardless of the organizational norms in the nation of origin, between KKW/WTF practitioners.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

terryl965 said:


> Look I just want to say this about childern in general, with all the video games teaching chi balls technique and all and how to fly from tree branches and rooftops we do not need schools anymore. Toy R Us has brought back the Black Belt in a box kit for only $29.95 plus tax. That is the way to get a BB nowadays.


Sorry, but I can order one with a line of gold stitching on each end plus rank stripes for less using my Dynamics wholesale account.


----------



## Cyriacus

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Sorry, but I can order one with a line of gold stitching on each end plus rank stripes for less using my Dynamics wholesale account.


Sorry to break it to You, but I bought a Black Belt for $3 Today. 
It has a nice buckle as well.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Is the idea of what a black belt is more universal between ATA practitioners?
> 
> In the US, there is, as we see on this board, a great deal of variance with regards to what a first dan should be capable of, regardless of the organizational norms in the nation of origin, between KKW/WTF practitioners.




I'm afraid not.  You'll find plenty of ATA black belts who are technically proficient and better... Unfortunately, you'll also see some BBs that need a lot of remedial work as well.  It depends on the school owner, much like in any other TKD group.  The actual organizational written standard is high.  Brown belts should have a great grasp of the basics.

Black belts that tested at HQ/Nationals/Worlds tend to be superior given the greater scrutiny.  In recent years the ATA leadership has attempted to increase the quality overall of their members by adding fitness requirements, etc.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

I wasn't thinking so much of variance between students but of the perception of what an average black belt student is, taking into account the age of the student (child vs. teen vs. adult vs. senior citizen).


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I wasn't thinking so much of variance between students but of the perception of what an average black belt student is, taking into account the age of the student (child vs. teen vs. adult vs. senior citizen).



I think you'll find that too.  Some member schools don't award full rank to their Tiny Tigers.  Others do with geup grades and official certificates.  Some schools follow that 'Black Belt is where you really start training' meme while others still think even a 1BD needs to be crisp and sharp.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

So they're no different than anyone else, but get negative publicity due to having a child BB division and a camo belt, along with light contact WTF style sparring, and they know how to run a profitable organization and establish profitable schools. 

And they seem to get more kids into news articles. 

Sounds like sour grapes on the part of everyone else.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> So they're no different than anyone else, but get negative publicity due to having a child BB division and a camo belt, along with light contact WTF style sparring, and they know how to run a profitable organization and establish profitable schools.
> 
> And they seem to get more kids into news articles.
> 
> Sounds like sour grapes on the part of everyone else.



They're an easy target due to the highly commercial operating plans used by many of their member school owners.  To be fair though, I admit some of the practices by SOME are rather questionable if one is trying to turn out skilled martial artists rather than good kids.  Like no-contact sparring for example.

This is one of the biggest cognitive dissonances ATA schools face with other people in the martial arts.  The fact is that you CAN'T create skilled fighters without a high level of contact or a more serious mindset in training.  I don't think anyone would argue that.  But clearly that's not the goal of ATA schools for the most part, though a few isolated pockets exist here and there.  So they get a lot of grief, but realistically if we look at many of their detractors, perhaps the same criticisms can be levied there also.


----------



## Twin Fist

whenever your goal is "to make money" instead of "to produce quality students" you will catch hell. And i dont think anyone would argue that the ATA, as an org, is more concerned with making money than making quality blackbelts. Some schools may not be, but the org itself clearly IS


----------



## dancingalone

Twin Fist said:


> whenever your goal is "to make money" instead of "to produce quality students" you will catch hell



TF, that's exactly the type of cognitive dissonance I refer to.  They ARE producing quality students, at least by their own school's internal measure.  A lot of school owners value turning out confident, sociable kids capable of working in teams more than they care about whether the kiddo can snap a sidekick into someone's rib and make it hurt.  It may not be what you and I prefer, but they're imminently successful at what they set as a goal.


----------



## Twin Fist

perhaps i should have said:

when your goal is to make money and not so much to produce high level fighters you will catch hell from people that focus on producing fighters instead of making money.


----------



## dancingalone

Twin Fist said:


> perhaps i should have said:
> 
> when your goal is to make money and not so much to produce high level fighters you will catch hell from people that focus on producing fighters instead of making money.



I look at the environment my niece and nephew train in and I conclude that they are doing something like soccer.  Fun physical activity in a positive, encouraging atmosphere.  Which is great.  I could think of a lot worse things they could be wasting their time on.

It is not what I do and rather than deploring it these days I look at it as an opportunity to differentiate myself from them with students who want a different focus in their training.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Twin Fist said:


> whenever your goal is "to make money" instead of "to produce quality students" you will catch hell. And i dont think anyone would argue that the ATA, as an org, is more concerned with making money than making quality blackbelts. Some schools may not be, but the org itself clearly IS


But I don't think that their main goal is to make money; I think that their goal is to provide a family friendly martial arts themed activity that produces "_confident, sociable kids capable of working in teams_" and that production of high level fighters simply is not on the menu.  

Unfortunately, the type of atmosphere that ATA schools strive for costs money; they want the schools in nice neighborhoods and they want their schools to look modern and up to date.  Nice facilities in retail space in a nice neigborhood costs money.  If you want your school to last, you need to be making enough to cover the costs.  The fact that the ATA, from what I understand, is very supportive of their schools and offers them tips and strategies on how to be financially solvent is actually a positive.  

They've identified their market and tailored their product accordingly.  Bully to them.  It isn't the product that I would want, so I shop elsewhere.  But then I'm not their intended market.


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> They've identified their market and tailored their product accordingly.  Bully to them.  It isn't the product that I would want, so I shop elsewhere.  But then I'm not their intended market.



it's sort of like shopping for a car, most people are not interested in driving a humvee everywhere and instead prefer something else. But then you have the humvee owners out there saying that your mercedes or mini cooper sucks and wouldn't last two seconds in a battle with a humvee. The mercedes and/or mini cooper owners look at the humvee guy and say who ever said I wanted to battle with you or anyone else in my car, that if safety was my number one priority I would have bought a volvo.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

puunui said:


> it's sort of like shopping for a car, most people are not interested in driving a humvee everywhere and instead prefer something else. But then you have the humvee owners out there saying that your mercedes or mini cooper sucks and wouldn't last two seconds in a battle with a humvee. The mercedes and/or mini cooper owners look at the humvee guy and say who ever said I wanted to battle with you or anyone else in my car, that if safety was my number one priority I would have bought a volvo.


More than likely, it would be Hummer owners saying, 'Your Mercedes or Mini Cooper sucks and would be stuck in two seconds going where my Hummer can go.'  The Mercedes and/or Mini Cooper owners look at the Hummer owner and say, 'who ever said I wanted to go where yourHummer can go?  If off roading were my number one priority, I would have bought a Wranger.'

Turn that into, 'Your ATA or WTF sucks and would get you killed in two seconds in a bar fight.'  The ATA and/or WTF taekwondoists look at the hard core guy and say, 'who ever said I wanted to get into a bar fight?  If bar fights were my number one priority, I would have become a bouncer.'

I have no idea what ATA schools teach regarding situational awareness and safety tips, but I'd bet that they do promote a clean, healthy lifestyle that doesn't involve going places where you have no business going, and if their students learn to live that clean, healthy lifestyle, the ATA will have done far more for their safety than all the hard core SD techniques ever devised.


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> More than likely, it would be Hummer owners saying, 'Your Mercedes or Mini Cooper sucks and would be stuck in two seconds going where my Hummer can go.'  The Mercedes and/or Mini Cooper owners look at the Hummer owner and say, 'who ever said I wanted to go where yourHummer can go?  If off roading were my number one priority, I would have bought a Wranger.'
> 
> Turn that into, 'Your ATA or WTF sucks and would get you killed in two seconds in a bar fight.'  The ATA and/or WTF taekwondoists look at the hard core guy and say, 'who ever said I wanted to get into a bar fight?  If bar fights were my number one priority, I would have become a bouncer.'
> 
> I have no idea what ATA schools teach regarding situational awareness and safety tips, but I'd bet that they do promote a clean, healthy lifestyle that doesn't involve going places where you have no business going, and if their students learn to live that clean, healthy lifestyle, the ATA will have done far more for their safety than all the hard core SD techniques ever devised.



Exactly. And I like your analogy better.


----------



## Kinghercules

Daniel Sullivan said:


> More than likely, it would be Hummer owners saying, 'Your Mercedes or Mini Cooper sucks and would be stuck in two seconds going where my Hummer can go.'  The Mercedes and/or Mini Cooper owners look at the Hummer owner and say, 'who ever said I wanted to go where yourHummer can go?  If off roading were my number one priority, I would have bought a Wranger.'
> 
> Turn that into, 'Your ATA or WTF sucks and would get you killed in two seconds in a bar fight.'  The ATA and/or WTF taekwondoists look at the hard core guy and say, 'who ever said I wanted to get into a bar fight?  If bar fights were my number one priority, I would have become a bouncer.'
> 
> I have no idea what ATA schools teach regarding situational awareness and safety tips, but I'd bet that they do promote a clean, healthy lifestyle that doesn't involve going places where you have no business going, and if their students learn to live that clean, healthy lifestyle, the ATA will have done far more for their safety than all the hard core SD techniques ever devised.



Why does it always gotta be about a "bar fight"? 
Why cant it be at the water park?  
Or the grocery store?
Or just because someone is havin a bad day and they feel like fightin.

You dont have to be in a bar to get into a fight.  I thought the purpose of MA was for self defense in any situation at any time.  Some where along the line that concept got lost in TKD world.


----------



## leadleg

Kinghercules said:


> Why does it always gotta be about a "bar fight"?
> Why cant it be at the water park?
> Or the grocery store?
> Or just because someone is havin a bad day and they feel like fightin.
> 
> You dont have to be in a bar to get into a fight.  I thought the purpose of MA was for self defense in any situation at any time.  Some where along the line that concept got lost in TKD world.


Why do you think it got lost? Don't all tkdoin practice punching and kicking? I don't know about others but to me punching, kicking, and blocking are usually what wins the fight, be it offense or defense. Unless someone has a bat.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Kinghercules said:


> Why does it always gotta be about a "bar fight"?
> Why cant it be at the water park?
> Or the grocery store?
> Or just because someone is havin a bad day and they feel like fightin.


If you're getting into fights at the water park and the grocery store or are around the kind of people who fight because they are having a bad day, then you need to examine your lifestyle and the people you associate with. I stopped having 'SD' situations the minute I stopped going to night clubs and distanced myself from most of my old crowd. 

Non physical elements are vastly more important in the circumstances that you list above, and those elements need no sparring or hard contact to develop. Learning effective verbal and social skills will help you 99.9 percent of the time, and I'd be willing to bet that most of these supposedly SD focused hard core schools spend zero time on those skills. 



Kinghercules said:


> You dont have to be in a bar to get into a fight.


No you don't, but if you are finding yourself around people that randomly want to pick fights, I'd be willing to bet that you are frequenting places where alcohol is flowing freely, or are simply accociating with toxic or delf destructive people.



Kinghercules said:


> I thought the purpose of MA was for self defense in any situation at any time. Some where along the line that concept got lost in TKD world.


You thought wrong. Self defense is only a very small part of modern (meaning late ninteenth century onward) martial arts. Gendai budo, which strongly influenced taekwondo (some argue that taekwondo comes out of gendai budo, specifically Shotokan), is about improving yourself via the martial path, not about self defense. SD is a byproduct of the martial arts, not the primary target.

Taekwondo is no more about self defense than MMA, boxing or kickboxing, and the same holds true for most other martial arts. Yes, you can defend yourself with MMA, judo, boxing, taekwondo, Shotokan, or aikido, and if you have a cane handy, you can defend yourself with kendo. 

Actually, the principles of kendo can be applied to unarmed defense as well; one of my students used 'kendo' with a schoolyard bully. He didn't have a sword or a shinai with him, but he used the non physical elements to gain advantage against a much larger boy who was intent upon beating him up, and popped him in the nose. My student had no unarmed training whatsoever and has never done any contact sparring outside of kendo, but he said that it was the fighting spirit, timing, and principles of offense and defense that came into play.

So, this kid defended himself with kendo, but kendo is not a self defense art. Likewise, you can defend yourself with any striking art, but it doesn't make it a self defense system. 

If you haven't, go and take a true self defense class. You'll find that it is a lot different from a taekwondo class, even a taekwondo class at a top notch, hard core school.  Much of what you learn (or should learn) in an actual self defense class is how to *avoid* fights and situations where you would need to physically defend yourself.  

Living safely is like driving; in driving, you train to drive safely and to avoid situations that will result in an accident, not crash survivability.  You train to stay out of the northbound lane when you are going south; you shouldn't be there and if you are, you may end up in a head on collision.  Drivers don't train to drive on the wrong side of the road and slalom through oncoming cars; that would be stupid; you're not supposed to be there in the first place.  Nor do drivers train to 'body check' cars that drift across the lines back into their own lanes; that would be stupid, as avoiding the idiot is a far better course of action with a much greater chance of success, and without the accompanying potential for legal problems.

Likewise, a clean, healthy lifestyle that doesn't involve going places where you have no business going, the social and verbal skills to handle antagonistic people, and the situational awareness to know when to extracate yourself from a potentially dangerous situation are of far greater value than any fight skill.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> If you're getting into fights at the water park and the grocery store or are around the kind of people who fight because they are having a bad day, then you need to examine your lifestyle and the people you associate with. I stopped having 'SD' situations the minute I stopped going to night clubs and distanced myself from most of my old crowd.
> ....
> 
> No you don't, but if you are finding yourself around people that randomly want to pick fights, I'd be willing to bet that you are frequenting places where alcohol is flowing freely, or are simply accociating with toxic or delf destructive people.
> ...
> Likewise, a clean, healthy lifestyle that doesn't involve going places where you have no business going, the social and verbal skills to handle antagonistic people, and the situational awareness to know when to extracate yourself from a potentially dangerous situation are of far greater value than any fight skill.



I agree with a lot of what you are saying here, but I do think there are plenty of public venues entirely proper to go to, that nonetheless offer a higher chance for violence than a bucolic picnic setting.

Like a sporting event for example.  The closest I've been to a fight in years came a couple of seasons ago at a NCAA football game when a rude guy shoved my son into my wife.  I had to use all my self-restraint to not pound him into the ground. 

It's not all about avoidance and living the Golden Path.  Sometimes violence does visit good people, even in improbable settings.  The sad example of that Connecticut home invasion and murder comes to mind.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> I agree with a lot of what you are saying here, but I do think there are plenty of public venues entirely proper to go to, that nonetheless offer a higher chance for violence than a bucolic picnic setting.
> 
> Like a sporting event for example. The closest I've been to a fight in years came a couple of seasons ago at a NCAA football game when a rude guy shoved my son into my wife. I had to use all my self-restraint to not pound him into the ground.
> 
> It's not all about avoidance and living the Golden Path. Sometimes violence does visit good people, even in improbable settings. The sad example of that Connecticut home invasion and murder comes to mind.


Absolutely agree, though I hope that you don't think that I was implying that all violence can be avoided by clean living. Violence does sometimes come to you, just as sometimes, cars come across the line into your lane. You do what you can, but sometimes, a violent encounter is unavoidable. 

But, while you cannot eliminate every potential violent threat any more than you can eliminate the chance of some bonehead causing an accident on the road, you can minimize the risks by controling your own behavioural patterns and lifestyle choices. Even home invasions can at least be guarded against; perpetrators do not pick their victims at random. If you go to the trouble to make your home a less appealing target, you can bet that someone else in the neigborhood didn't. Kind of in the same way that I don't have to be faster than the bear, just faster than the other guy.

I don't even think that you need to live a golden path.  I do think, however, that engaging one's brain and using good sense and developing good habits go a very long way.


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Even home invasions can at least be guarded against; perpetrators do not pick their victims at random. If you go to the trouble to make your home a less appealing target, you can bet that someone else in the neigborhood didn't.



I don't live in an area where there are a lot of home invasions, at least not when people are obviously home. But what I did was I got a sign from an alarm company and posted it near the front door, even though I don't have an alarm for the house. A police officer friend told me that the probability of getting your home broken into if you have an alarm sign goes drastically down, because would be intruders rather not risk the alarm and instead bypass it for homes that do not have an alarm sign. Having said that, I am thinking about getting a home alarm system, because it isn't all that much.


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Absolutely agree, though I hope that you don't think that I was implying that all violence can be avoided by clean living. Violence does sometimes come to you, just as sometimes, cars come across the line into your lane. You do what you can, but sometimes, a violent encounter is unavoidable.



Having said that, I think that there are definitely things that one can do to greatly reduce the risk of getting attacked. Stop going to alcohol establishments frequented by young males. Changing jobs. Moving to a safer neighborhood. Things like that, if safety is your utmost priority. Most involve avoidance behaviors, which has already been mentioned above.


----------



## Gentle Fist

How much did that "black" belt cost the mom?  $1000?  $2000?   Unfortunately, the day may come where he finds out the hard way just what his "black" belt really means...


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

fistlaw720 said:


> How much did that "black" belt cost the mom?  $1000?  $2000?   Unfortunately, the day may come where he finds out the hard way just what his "black" belt really means...


What?  That he's a well adjusted human being in good health because he gets regular exercise?  Some adult black belts should be so lucky.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Thesemindz said:


> On the other hand, I bet I could kick his little black belt *** in a fight.



If you couldn't I'd be worried. If you wanted to I'd be even more worried.


----------



## Cirdan

The kid is probably a 4th Dan by now.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Cirdan said:


> The kid is probably a 4th Dan by now.



There is an age requirement to be a master in TKD, I think it's 10 years old.  At least that would parellel Hapkido these days...:uhyeah:


----------



## RTKDCMB

Kinghercules said:


> Why does it always gotta be about a "bar fight"?
> Why cant it be at the water park?
> Or the grocery store?


Because that's where you are most likely to find drunken idiots.,


----------



## Rumy73

Proving Tkd is joke once again.


----------



## jks9199

Let me remind everyone of the Rules here at MartialTalk.



> *1.10.2 No Art bashing. *
> 
> No one art is "the best", no one  "style" is the best. All have their strengths and weaknesses. Do your  research and find what best fits your ability and need.



You're allowed to have a negative view of any given art, and to state your opinions.  But do it in a way that isn't insulting, rude, or simply obnoxious.


----------

