Black Belt Boot Camp

[Tony Dismukes]

Not sure I’m ready to agree that “most” people aren’t physically suited. We can definitely agree that some folks aren’t. But even that would depend on the program. Wouldn’t it?

He may have been referring to the program described in the original post - 6 hours per day, 7 days per week of TKD for 12 weeks. I’d agree that the average person would be at a high risk of injury with a program like that unless it included several hours per day of academic class time on topics like the Korean language and history of TKD. Most people aren’t ready for 6 hours a day of physical exercise 7 days per week. Even when I was 18 years old and went through basic training, I’m pretty certain that the physical exercise portion of boot camp didn’t come close to 6 hours daily 7 days per week. There was a whole lot of classroom time and mental indoctrination.

That said, you could definitely come up with an appropriate intensive 12 week training program for most people. It’s just that the implementation of “intensive” would differ considerably based on the population you were targeting the program for.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Here's the simple point, man. Drop Bear isn't speaking hypothetically. His school has been running both programs in parallel for as long as I can remember him posting on this forum. We know these types of programs work in general. I've shared multiple examples. And we know that these types of programs work on a very practical level in MA. Drop Bear's school demonstrates that and has for many years. He literally said earlier in this thread that some of the boot camp fighters out perform martial artists with years of experience.

It's time to move on from, "can it work?" to discussing how it works. The much more interesting and constructive conversation is about what would help make a program succeed and what might some of the pitfalls be? What are the pros and cons? What kinds of things lend themselves to a 12 week program and what kinds of things don't?

And that's where it feels like you're working to be contentious. I haven't seen anyone say such a program can't work - just that there are probably aspects and people it won't work as well for. Which hardly seems revelatory.

And maybe instead of arguing with Drop Bear, just listen to what he has to say. He's got actual experience on the topic. I'd like to learn more about what his school does and what pitfalls they've encountered.

Where have I argued anything about whether or how these work - with him or anyone else here?

I think we have enough data to support some meta-analysis. There are other kinds of valid analysis of data than a randomized control group. Through the sheer numbers and longevity of the program at drop bear's school, they have substantial apples to apples experience, combined with what we can see in analogous programs in other sports and non-sport activities, I think we're good. Where some analysis can help is to dig into why their program works.

Sure, we can get some analysis from what we have. Enough to say the program is effective for what it does (which it reportedly does quite well). Which isn't the same as the question implicit in the OP - to whit, can a bootcamp produce the same or better result (on all the aspects normally considered) as standard TKD training to BB. You're pushing hard against this topic as if I were arguing against the effectiveness of the program at that gym, when even DB has been pushing back toward the question of TKD, because that's the original question.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Something to consider is that self selection isn't a good or bad thing. It's just a thing. In any program, there are going to be people well suited for it or ill suited for it. That may mean that those folks are not well suited for any 12 week program... or it may mean that those folks aren't well suited for THAT program.

It can, in fact, be either, so you are correct. It just skews results. If you get "good" self-selection, a program will overperform, because you managed to attract those best suited for it. Conversely, "bad" self-selection can lead to underperformance. Or anything between those extremes.

It just also means we aren't quite comparing apples to apples when we talk about two self-selected groups doing different activities.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Not sure I’m ready to agree that “most” people aren’t physically suited. We can definitely agree that some folks aren’t. But even that would depend on the program. Wouldn’t it?

Yeah, unless we start with an audience of "everyone" (which I agree doesn't seem like a reasonable start for this discussion), that might be overstating it. I think most folks who start a MA program (a reasonable audience to start from) could probably manage a well-designed bootcamp, since a well-designed bootcamp would include the ability to deal with a range of incoming fitness levels.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

He may have been referring to the program described in the original post - 6 hours per day, 7 days per week of TKD for 12 weeks. I’d agree that the average person would be at a high risk of injury with a program like that unless it included several hours per day of academic class time on topics like the Korean language and history of TKD. Most people aren’t ready for 6 hours a day of physical exercise 7 days per week. Even when I was 18 years old and went through basic training, I’m pretty certain that the physical exercise portion of boot camp didn’t come close to 6 hours daily 7 days per week. There was a whole lot of classroom time and mental indoctrination.

That said, you could definitely come up with an appropriate intensive 12 week training program for most people. It’s just that the implementation of “intensive” would differ considerably based on the population you were targeting the program for.

Good point. Though we'd have to also consider that standard TKD training includes a lot of forms. Slow, methodical training of forms for part of each day makes it more within reach.

 

[MetalBoar]

He may have been referring to the program described in the original post - 6 hours per day, 7 days per week of TKD for 12 weeks. I’d agree that the average person would be at a high risk of injury with a program like that unless it included several hours per day of academic class time on topics like the Korean language and history of TKD. Most people aren’t ready for 6 hours a day of physical exercise 7 days per week. Even when I was 18 years old and went through basic training, I’m pretty certain that the physical exercise portion of boot camp didn’t come close to 6 hours daily 7 days per week. There was a whole lot of classroom time and mental indoctrination.

That said, you could definitely come up with an appropriate intensive 12 week training program for most people. It’s just that the implementation of “intensive” would differ considerably based on the population you were targeting the program for.

Yep! I agree with this. There are a lot of ways this sort of thing could be structured.

When I said I'd be interested in 12 week boot camp to kickstart my journey in a new art I was envisioning something more like 90 minutes to 2 hours a day weekdays and then maybe 6 hour days on weekends or something like that. If I didn't have to work, or was 30 years younger and single, something like the 3 hours in the morning, 3 in the evening, that @drop bear's school does would be fun to try. Though not a boot camp, I think even something like the "Intro to Fencing" class I described would be very worth while, with maybe some long weekend sessions thrown in to make it more "boot campy".

Regardless, even though I'm in decent shape, being a guy in my 50's, if it was a high volume schedule I'd probably need to alternate between highly technical days that were less physically demanding and days more focused on conditioning or sparring. The more physically intense, and the longer the sessions, the more "technical" days I'd need to be able to recover. It seems like you could develop a program where the core curriculum* was paced to accommodate a fairly wide range of fitness and recovery levels and offer "elective" conditioning sessions, or open mat sessions, for those who needed/wanted them and had the ability to recover.

* This may not work if the goal of the curriculum is to produce a BB in 12 weeks. If that's possible, it may require that all the participants are young and fit to begin with. If you're just trying to give everyone a strong understanding of the fundamentals it seems pretty achievable.

 

[Flying Crane]

He may have been referring to the program described in the original post - 6 hours per day, 7 days per week of TKD for 12 weeks. I’d agree that the average person would be at a high risk of injury with a program like that unless it included several hours per day of academic class time on topics like the Korean language and history of TKD. Most people aren’t ready for 6 hours a day of physical exercise 7 days per week. Even when I was 18 years old and went through basic training, I’m pretty certain that the physical exercise portion of boot camp didn’t come close to 6 hours daily 7 days per week. There was a whole lot of classroom time and mental indoctrination.

That said, you could definitely come up with an appropriate intensive 12 week training program for most people. It’s just that the implementation of “intensive” would differ considerably based on the population you were targeting the program for.

There is another part that is being overlooked: who is putting on the bootcamp? For that person, it is a full-time job. If training is 6-7 hours per day, the person running it is putting in a full 8 hour work day. Who is willing to work 84 days straight, without a break? Burnout is real, people start to resent the work. So it isn’t just the people enduring the training, but those giving it as well.

Years ago I worked seven days a week for several months. I had a full-time job and a weekend gig and worked every day. The weekend work was physical work as a scuba diver in a public aquarium, cleaning tanks and feeding animals. The weekday stuff was working in a law firm as a legal assistant. And I was training capoeira four days a week as well, but that was in addition to the 8+ hours workday. Working that hard was miserable, you begin to crave a day off and it sucks, even though it wasnt 6 hours every day of physical training. And I started missing days because i was getting sick.

I think a bootcamp can be well designed and successful, but not the way it is described in the OP. That is idiotic, in my opinion.

 

[Steve]

It can, in fact, be either, so you are correct. It just skews results. If you get "good" self-selection, a program will overperform, because you managed to attract those best suited for it. Conversely, "bad" self-selection can lead to underperformance. Or anything between those extremes.

It just also means we aren't quite comparing apples to apples when we talk about two self-selected groups doing different activities.

I think there's a mixup in how you're defining performance expectations for these programs.

if a program attracts the most suitable candidates, and then successfully delivers to those folks, isn't that just performing? How is that over performing?

I'd say overperforming would be when a program is very unsuccessful at attracting the most suitable candidates, and ends up being successful in spite of that. Now that would be overperforming... in a very good way.

Underperforming would be when a program successfully targets a particular group and fails to deliver promised results.

 

[Steve]

And that's where it feels like you're working to be contentious. I haven't seen anyone say such a program can't work - just that there are probably aspects and people it won't work as well for. Which hardly seems revelatory.


Where have I argued anything about whether or how these work - with him or anyone else here?

Sure, we can get some analysis from what we have. Enough to say the program is effective for what it does (which it reportedly does quite well). Which isn't the same as the question implicit in the OP - to whit, can a bootcamp produce the same or better result (on all the aspects normally considered) as standard TKD training to BB. You're pushing hard against this topic as if I were arguing against the effectiveness of the program at that gym, when even DB has been pushing back toward the question of TKD, because that's the original question.

All I can say is, if you feel like you're not having fun with the discussion, just let it go. I'm not trying to be contentious, but I also recognize that when you start accusing me of it, there's not much I can do to change your mind. I'll stick with talking about the topic at hand. Otherwise, I'm done with this stuff. No good can come from it.

 

[Steve]

There is another part that is being overlooked: who is putting on the bootcamp? For that person, it is a full-time job. If training is 6-7 hours per day, the person running it is putting in a full 8 hour work day. Who is willing to work 84 days straight, without a break? Burnout is real, people start to resent the work. So it isn’t just the people enduring the training, but those giving it as well.

Years ago I worked seven days a week for several months. I had a full-time job and a weekend gig and worked every day. The weekend work was physical work as a scuba diver in a public aquarium, cleaning tanks and feeding animals. The weekday stuff was working in a law firm as a legal assistant. And I was training capoeira four days a week as well, but that was in addition to the 8+ hours workday. Working that hard was miserable, you begin to crave a day off and it sucks, even though it wasnt 6 hours every day of physical training. And I started missing days because i was getting sick.

I think a bootcamp can be well designed and successful, but not the way it is described in the OP. That is idiotic, in my opinion.

Is it just one person putting it on? Honestly, that would never have occurred to me. That does seem unreasonable. I'd expect that these bootcamps would have a team of instructors.

 

[Steve]

Yeah, unless we start with an audience of "everyone" (which I agree doesn't seem like a reasonable start for this discussion), that might be overstating it. I think most folks who start a MA program (a reasonable audience to start from) could probably manage a well-designed bootcamp, since a well-designed bootcamp would include the ability to deal with a range of incoming fitness levels.

Sure. You could also have different boot camps for different people. Shoot, I'm wondering what a school would be like if it offered MA training in a structure similar to a college curriculum. Classes chunked into roughly 12 week curricula, where people could progress through them in a rough order. Some would be more foundational, some could be more advanced with perhaps pre-requisites. Some are "graded" based on objective, measurable standards. Others are more supplemental... just for fun.

Really, not much different than how many schools are organized, but just a little more structured. I think it could work... if you could sell it to the customer.

 

[drop bear]

Agreed. I was just responding to your vague comment earlier about programs obviously being the same because some person decidded the metrics for both.

So, getting back to the point you were deriving from, it'd depend what the intention of both programs was - and we'd have to have a reasonable evaluation to match the intention.

An interesting point here is that I don't think we'd need fully controlled studies to determine if each has an advantage, because I suspect each has an advantage to some of the people who'd select into that group, themselves. So someone who is highly driven and can take (and probably thrive on) the hard schedule of the bootcamp is probably best served by at least starting with that. While someone who isn't so driven (different priorities, or simply prefers to work at a methodical pace with time to think between classes) will likely do better in the long-form format. If I had the time to offer both (and enough students to make it worth doing), I think that'd be ideal to have both, so some folks could get that quick start. I highly doubt they'd have the same level of understanding as someone with the same training hours distributed over the calendar, but they'd get a fitness boost and a really good technical start.

And what are you basing that opinion on?

Because if you are basically eye balling that. And whoever is in charge of the 12 week program is eyeballing that and flying crane is eyeballing that.

Then the results are the same you say your program works. Flying crane says his program works and 12 week guy says their program works.

 

[MetalBoar]

Sure. You could also have different boot camps for different people. Shoot, I'm wondering what a school would be like if it offered MA training in a structure similar to a college curriculum. Classes chunked into roughly 12 week curricula, where people could progress through them in a rough order. Some would be more foundational, some could be more advanced with perhaps pre-requisites. Some are "graded" based on objective, measurable standards. Others are more supplemental... just for fun.

Really, not much different than how many schools are organized, but just a little more structured. I think it could work... if you could sell it to the customer.

Even though I advocate for something like this approach, I have some reservations.

Most partner dancing classes seem to be organized like this (minus the grading) and I've had difficulty with the format. A lot of it comes down to the fact that with dance, most of the students seem to want to get exposure to the largest amount of vocabulary possible during the time period they've paid for, with little interest in reinforcement. In dance, that can sort of work if there are a lot of opportunities to practice outside of class, but it's harder for MA if you need a mat or access to gear, facilities, or training partners that aren't available.

Now with dance, my experience has usually been with 90 minute classes, once a week, and frequently, most of the class time is filled with the introduction of new vocabulary with little (often no) review of previous work. When learning a new physical skill (and motor learning research tends to indicate this is pretty much the norm) I find that my brain is full after about 45 minutes, so I can hang onto about an hours worth of new material with my fingertips if I really try. The last 30 minutes of each class is pretty much lost. This means that after a few classes I'm missing a lot of the material that's been covered, and retaking the class is still inefficient, because the material that I didn't get is still at the end of each class when my brain is full. Sure, I get the "earlier" stuff down better, so my brain is less full, but it's so much slower and more painful than it needs to be.

Which wouldn't be such a problem if either:

1. We reviewed the material the next class or -
2. The class was an hour long or -
3. The last 30-45 minutes of class were spent just practicing the techniques covered and getting instructor feedback

Once a week is also sub-optimal for learning new physical skills, but I think it's a less impactful element.

Now, there's no reason an MA class has to be structured like a dance class, unless of course, those who are willing to pay for it also want exposure to as many techniques as possible with little interest in reinforcement.

EDIT: I should also add that sometimes the dance classes just fall apart for me because I miss key elements in those last 30 minutes that are necessary to understand the following days'/weeks' instruction.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

There is another part that is being overlooked: who is putting on the bootcamp? For that person, it is a full-time job. If training is 6-7 hours per day, the person running it is putting in a full 8 hour work day. Who is willing to work 84 days straight, without a break? Burnout is real, people start to resent the work. So it isn’t just the people enduring the training, but those giving it as well.

In larger schools/gyms, it would be a team. I expect that’s the case at DB’s gym - they seem well organized in their approach.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think there's a mixup in how you're defining performance expectations for these programs.

if a program attracts the most suitable candidates, and then successfully delivers to those folks, isn't that just performing? How is that over performing?

I'd say overperforming would be when a program is very unsuccessful at attracting the most suitable candidates, and ends up being successful in spite of that. Now that would be overperforming... in a very good way.

Underperforming would be when a program successfully targets a particular group and fails to deliver promised results.

I’d agree we are using different valid definitions of those terms. I was referring to over performing as doing better than with random selection, which would be the desired outcome.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Is it just one person putting it on? Honestly, that would never have occurred to me. That does seem unreasonable. I'd expect that these bootcamps would have a team of instructors.

Agreed. Aside from the time issue, I don’t see how one person could maintain good practices running a program at that pace solo.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Sure. You could also have different boot camps for different people. Shoot, I'm wondering what a school would be like if it offered MA training in a structure similar to a college curriculum. Classes chunked into roughly 12 week curricula, where people could progress through them in a rough order. Some would be more foundational, some could be more advanced with perhaps pre-requisites. Some are "graded" based on objective, measurable standards. Others are more supplemental... just for fun.

Really, not much different than how many schools are organized, but just a little more structured. I think it could work... if you could sell it to the customer.

It would be cool to see how it worked out. I wonder if anyone has done anything at that level, aside from how some online/video courses are marketed.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

And what are you basing that opinion on?

Because if you are basically eye balling that. And whoever is in charge of the 12 week program is eyeballing that and flying crane is eyeballing that.

Then the results are the same you say your program works. Flying crane says his program works and 12 week guy says their program works.

You mean my opinion that there would likely be advantages to different people and/or different aspects of study in different types of programs? On a knowledge of how people learn, how priorities affect activities, how different people prefer information over time, and a myriad of examples over a lifetime.

Most of that isn’t scientific, but it’s also not just “eyeballing it”. Not everyone thrives in or prefers (not necessarily the same thing) the same approach or learning environment.

 

[Flying Crane]

In larger schools/gyms, it would be a team. I expect that’s the case at DB’s gym - they seem well organized in their approach.

Well, I’m not commenting on what might be going on in his gym, I am focused on the OP. The thought that the organizer and promoter of this bootcamp thinks it’s reasonable and realistic for the participants to engage in 6-7 hours of physical training daily for 84 days straight while he gets to have a team to deliver the training, so he gets time off and such while he isnt even doing all of the physical training himself, speaks volumes.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Well, I’m not commenting on what might be going on in his gym, I am focused on the OP. The thought that the organizer and promoter of this bootcamp thinks it’s reasonable and realistic for the participants to engage in 6-7 hours of physical training daily for 84 days straight while he gets to have a team to deliver the training, so he gets time off and such while he isnt even doing all of the physical training himself, speaks volumes.

If that’s really 6-7 hours a day of serious physical training, I doubt many people would enter with the ability to complete the first week in any shape to complete the second.

If it’s 6-7 weeks of a combination of things (including technical work), it’s more reasonable.

Edit: I wouldn’t expect an instructor to repeatedly go through the same rigorous boot camp. It doesn’t bother me if the instructor is using a team. Seems a good idea.