Black Belt Boot Camp

[drop bear]

I still think it’s just missing the mark though. You could test them on the formal curriculum (including forms) and it is possible that they would do well. Memorizing movement sequences is not difficult. But the deeper understanding and ability to use it creatively and spontaneously is not as straight forward. That can often get missed in a test. I think a test is often misleading. This would be more like cramming to pass a test without really developing a lasting understanding of the method.

To me, the whole idea of a boot camp like this to take someone from zero to shodan in 12 weeks just doesn’t pass the BS sniffer. On its face it is a silly proposal. That does not mean that all boot camps are useless or stupid. I am sure they can be effective for the right people if the goals are appropriate and the proper background and foundation is in place. But not zero to shodan in such a short period of time.

But they have both spent the same time training. Just one group does it over 12 weeks. The other does it over 2 years

They both have the same depth of understanding.

 

[skribs]

Civilian to Soldier in 10 weeks. Civilian to Marine in 13 weeks. That boy in high school who's working up the courage to ask his crush to the prom right now as we speak could possibly be in Ukraine fighting off the Russians before Christmas (if things were to escalate to that level by then). In that short amount of time, they have to learn marksmanship, individual tactical maneuvers (moving under fire, etc), first aid, CPR, digging a foxhole, protection against chemical and biological weapons, land navigation, etc.

I'm just not seeing how, if this can be done in such a short amount of time, making a black belt can't be.

The one difference I see is that you continue to do the training after becoming a soldier or Marine. That plays a huge part in maintaining those skills.

Someone who did something for 3 months and then stopped may not have the same retention as someone who did 3 years and stopped. I'm not 100% sure on this, but it's at least a hypothesis.

 

[drop bear]

I still think it’s just missing the mark though. You could test them on the formal curriculum (including forms) and it is possible that they would do well. Memorizing movement sequences is not difficult. But the deeper understanding and ability to use it creatively and spontaneously is not as straight forward. That can often get missed in a test. I think a test is often misleading. This would be more like cramming to pass a test without really developing a lasting understanding of the method.

To me, the whole idea of a boot camp like this to take someone from zero to shodan in 12 weeks just doesn’t pass the BS sniffer. On its face it is a silly proposal. That does not mean that all boot camps are useless or stupid. I am sure they can be effective for the right people if the goals are appropriate and the proper background and foundation is in place. But not zero to shodan in such a short period of time.

But they have both spent the same time training. Just one group does it over 12 weeks. The other does it over 2 years

They both have the same depth of understanding.

The one difference I see is that you continue to do the training after becoming a soldier or Marine. That plays a huge part in maintaining those skills.

Someone who did something for 3 months and then stopped may not have the same retention as someone who did 3 years and stopped. I'm not 100% sure on this, but it's at least a hypothesis.

Although I would think if we picked both students at the end of their training journeys. The 12 weeker would smoke the 2 year guy.

If not just on physicality.

 

[OLD DOG NEW TRICKS]

I saw this article posted on a Facebook group I'm in.
Black Belt in 12 Weeks

The basic gist of the article is a TKD Master in China has a program where you train 6 hours a day, 7 days a week, for 12 weeks, and you can get your black belt. Putting aside the "guaranteed black belt" nature of this program, the question is: can someone really be a black belt in 12 weeks? And, to be clear, we're comparing this to other TKD schools, where a black belt is a 2-3 year degree, and not more traditional TKD schools or other martial arts, where it's more of an 8-12 year endeavor.

What are your thoughts on such a boot camp?

I'm of a couple of minds on this, and I'll go back and forth throughout this post. I'm trying to look past "3 months, lol should take 3 years", and actually look at the effectiveness of training 42 hours per week.

Argument For
In a typical TKD school, students will spend 2-3 days doing anywhere up to 1 hour of class time per week. A black belt often takes a minimum of 2-3 years at these schools, although an average student can complete their black belt in 3-5 years (in my experience). Assuming relatively strong attendance of 50 weeks/year, this gives us a number of mat hours to get black belt of:

	2 years	3 years	5 years
2 hours per week	200	300	500
3 hours per week	300	450	750

In the Boot Camp program, you attend 504 hours (6*7*12), which is similar to a 2-hour-per-week student at 5 years, and more than a 3-hour-per-week student at 3 years. If you accept that a TKD black belt can be earned in 3-5 years at 2-3 hours per week, then this is a similar amount of mat time.

Argument Against
A TKD black belt may have around 300-500 mat hours, but they also will have practice hours outside of mat time. In order for a student to learn everything in the curriculum, they will most likely need to practice at home. This will be a combination of applying advice from class, running through curriculum requirements (such as forms) for memorization, or just having fun with the techniques.

On that note, the question becomes - can a student physically and mentally absorb the training in just 6 weeks?

• Physically - 42 hours per week of training is an incredible amount. I did 20 hours per week of teaching and training, and teaching is certainly easier than training. Right now, I'm struggling to keep up with a 2-hour-per-day schedule of BJJ and Muay Thai. It's also going to be difficult to build muscle memory, build secondary supporting muscles, flexibility, etc. during the course of 3 months. Recovery time is a part of training, and it's not really accounted for here.
• Mentally - Beginners are often "drinking from a firehose" for information. I know at the end of BJJ class, the purple belts will give me advice, and if they give me too much advice, I can't keep up. I'm at my limit for how much meaningful teaching I can receive in BJJ. Just like how your muscles need recovery time, so does your brain. I know that I see a big increase in retention from students who go 3x per week instead of 2x, but I don't see much more increase when it's upped to 4x or 5x. We've started to plateau at that point. If you start to plateau at 3 hours per week, then the difference between 30 and 40 is not that high.

Argument For
A boot camp is not a typical class. A typical class is an elective, an after-school activity, or a hobby you do for fun after work. A boot camp like this is your job for the 3 months you do it. Your day is built around the boot camp, not the other way around. Thus, your mind and body should be relatively fresh each day going into this.

Additionally, the type of person who is able to withstand 6 hours per day of training (assuming the load isn't lightened to make 6 hours possible for the average person), they are likely the type of person who would be held back by time-in-grade requirements.

I know that my personal progress accelerated when I started teaching. I was learning the curriculum faster than it could be taught to me. When I got yellow belt, I knew half of the yellow belt material already. When I got purple belt, I knew three quarters of it. I got to the point where I was so far ahead, whenever I got a new belt, it would take me a week or two to learn the material I had left, and then I would just be waiting for the next test.

I took detailed notes after every class, and I practiced multiple hours a day at home. I also had prior experience, and had started over as a white belt. But the point is, it's possible for someone like me to accelerate faster than what is typical. So I can see it being argued here that you could be accelerated as well. Especially if someone is already trained in martial arts.

Argument Against
With all that said, I don't know that it's fair to create a boot camp for the average person, who might have no prior training, to come in and start from scratch.

On that note, you also miss out on a few other things. If everyone is in the boot camp together, then you can't see leadership skills develop. You can't see how attitudes change over time. You miss out on having people who are senior and junior students to see how folks respond to different situations. There's something about the dedication to the art that time-in-grade covers much better than mat hours.

Wow, 12 weeks to become what we spent 4 to 8 years doing! You might as well buy your BB on eBay the students would be almost as skilled in martial arts as 12 weeks of training. This is hilarious .

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I still think it’s just missing the mark though. You could test them on the formal curriculum (including forms) and it is possible that they would do well. Memorizing movement sequences is not difficult. But the deeper understanding and ability to use it creatively and spontaneously is not as straight forward. That can often get missed in a test. I think a test is often misleading. This would be more like cramming to pass a test without really developing a lasting understanding of the method.

To me, the whole idea of a boot camp like this to take someone from zero to shodan in 12 weeks just doesn’t pass the BS sniffer. On its face it is a silly proposal. That does not mean that all boot camps are useless or stupid. I am sure they can be effective for the right people if the goals are appropriate and the proper background and foundation is in place. But not zero to shodan in such a short period of time.

I see your point. I was just addressing the idea of whether they’d do as well (or better) in the standard requirements- which usually means a test.

At the same time, I agree a test doesn’t really tell the story. I can test someone in NGA and know far more about their command of the principles than any test scoring would show. And even then, I’d know far less about that than I would if I taught them for a few classes.

And in some systems, command of the principles is very important.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Civilian to Soldier in 10 weeks. Civilian to Marine in 13 weeks. That boy in high school who's working up the courage to ask his crush to the prom right now as we speak could possibly be in Ukraine fighting off the Russians before Christmas (if things were to escalate to that level by then). In that short amount of time, they have to learn marksmanship, individual tactical maneuvers (moving under fire, etc), first aid, CPR, digging a foxhole, protection against chemical and biological weapons, land navigation, etc.

I'm just not seeing how, if this can be done in such a short amount of time, making a black belt can't be.

Are they fully competent soldiers in that time, or minimally competent?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Simple math. If A is greater than B, and A takes x amount of time to produce, then the time it takes to produce B is equal to or less than x.

Where are you getting your greater than and less than values?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You guys are getting to the nut of it here, which is how do we know if the program is successful? If this is TKD, and there are TKD competitions, then I'm not sure I understand why this is so hard?

Look, if there was some kind of accelerated BJJ program that purports to get folks to blue belt in 12 weeks (roughly analogous to black belt in some arts), it would be fairly simple to figure out if the program is successful or not. You just simply have your folks compete in an event as a blue belt and evaluate their performance. I wouldn't even set the bar at "they have to win or this doesn't work." Rather, did they perform well? Were they roughly performing at what you and other objective observers would consider competitive at that level?

And in an activity where there are no clear, measurable standards for evaluating performance, because there is no clearly defined purpose for the training, it's understandable that evaluating a program like this would be difficult and may even be perceived as threatening to the status quo. I'm not at all surprised you don't buy it. Totally understandable. What does a black belt (or equivalent) in your style actually represent in clear, measurable, objective terms?

As said earlier, this isn't a monolith. We're talking big picture about whether a program like this COULD be done in theory. I think the answer is sure, why not? We have literally seen examples of it in martial arts in this thread, and I've shared at least three or four analogous programs. We know that intensive programs can work. Whether individual programs are successful or not would depend on the structure of the program, the goals for the program, the intended outcomes, and the competence of the instructor... among other things. But in general? It's not even debatable.

And this thread is also some discussion about whether this specific program could work. The answer to that, IMO, is maybe, but we don't have enough information to evaluate it. See above.

I skimmed this, as I’m a bit distracted at the moment, so if I don’t respond to part of it, let me know.

My point was that fighting skill is only one metric. Someone can be a better fighter (even within the specific ruleset) and still have learned less. In fact, I expect in many MA, a limited subset of the art makes a better fighting curriculum, especially for beginners.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

But they have both spent the same time training. Just one group does it over 12 weeks. The other does it over 2 years

They both have the same depth of understanding.

That doesn’t account for the time to process the information. There’s more of that time (probably excessively so) in the 2-year approach. Understanding doesn’t happen exclusively during training time.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The one difference I see is that you continue to do the training after becoming a soldier or Marine. That plays a huge part in maintaining those skills.

Someone who did something for 3 months and then stopped may not have the same retention as someone who did 3 years and stopped. I'm not 100% sure on this, but it's at least a hypothesis.

That seems more than a little likely. Assuming the 3-year participant gave some thought to the topic outside training, they almost certainly have better retention of the topic after a similar break.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Although I would think if we picked both students at the end of their training journeys. The 12 weeker would smoke the 2 year guy.

If not just on physicality.

As Tony pointed out, that would depend. If they hadn’t gone in with a good physical baseline, after 12 weeks they might not be capable of the fight. That’s more or less what happened to me in my new job last year. The hard work got me very fit in a short period, then left me injured. If I’d been anted to fight in July, I’d have been in good shape for it. By September, I was even more fit, but that same fight wouldn’t even have been an option.

 

[Flying Crane]

I skimmed this, as I’m a bit distracted at the moment, so if I don’t respond to part of it, let me know.

My point was that fighting skill is only one metric. Someone can be a better fighter (even within the specific ruleset) and still have learned less. In fact, I expect in many MA, a limited subset of the art makes a better fighting curriculum, especially for beginners.

An untrained person can be very successful as a fighter with natural athletic talent and raw aggression alone. Many such people can readily beat a lot of highly trained martial artists. If you give that person some basic, low-level training to help them better understand power principles and clean up their technique, those people can be truly fearsome. Let’s just be honest: you do not need to practice a sophisticated martial art to be good at fighting.

But that does not make such a person a shodan. Having a deeper understanding of a combat methodology is a big part of it, aside from fighting ability. So I reject fighting ability across the board as any indicator or litmus test for the success or worthiness of a bootcamp. Given the broad range of variables, it is a moot issue, it just isn’t worth the discussion.

 

[Steve]

Are they fully competent soldiers in that time, or minimally competent?

They’re like black belts.

 

[Steve]

I skimmed this, as I’m a bit distracted at the moment, so if I don’t respond to part of it, let me know.

My point was that fighting skill is only one metric. Someone can be a better fighter (even within the specific ruleset) and still have learned less. In fact, I expect in many MA, a limited subset of the art makes a better fighting curriculum, especially for beginners.

Unless fighting skill, or some other skill, is the entire point. Right? What’s the point of the 12 week program? Well it really depends, doesn’t it? You guys are applying all kinds of… I hate to use the word, but arbitrary standards to a program we know little about. Of course there are some things that can’t be taught in 12 weeks.

That said, I bet you can teach a lot more in 12 weeks than most people believe. 12 weeks is about how long college classes last in some places. You can learn and process a heck of a lot in that time, given appropriate structure and motivation.

 

[drop bear]

As Tony pointed out, that would depend. If they hadn’t gone in with a good physical baseline, after 12 weeks they might not be capable of the fight. That’s more or less what happened to me in my new job last year. The hard work got me very fit in a short period, then left me injured. If I’d been anted to fight in July, I’d have been in good shape for it. By September, I was even more fit, but that same fight wouldn’t even have been an option.

The guy training twice a week can get injured as well.

 

[drop bear]

An untrained person can be very successful as a fighter with natural athletic talent and raw aggression alone. Many such people can readily beat a lot of highly trained martial artists. If you give that person some basic, low-level training to help them better understand power principles and clean up their technique, those people can be truly fearsome. Let’s just be honest: you do not need to practice a sophisticated martial art to be good at fighting.

But that does not make such a person a shodan. Having a deeper understanding of a combat methodology is a big part of it, aside from fighting ability. So I reject fighting ability across the board as any indicator or litmus test for the success or worthiness of a bootcamp. Given the broad range of variables, it is a moot issue, it just isn’t worth the discussion.

According to this it makes them better than a shodan.

 

[Flying Crane]

Bestowing rank comes down to someone’s judgement call. I guess if we aren’t a member of their group, we have no input in the matter. So if someone wants to put together and market a 12 week bootcamp taking students from zero to shodan, that is their business. I find it ridiculous, but I am not running a bootcamp and I am not bestowing the rank afterwards. My standards are my own, and the standards of others are their own concern. For better or for worse.

I find a lot of what goes on around rank in the martial arts to be silly. Lots of people wearing black belts who I feel were not deserving. But again, they are not my students so my opinion matters not.

A lot of excessively high black belt ranks are self-bestowed as well, in an attempt (I believe) to one-up the competition down the street, and to satisfy an insatiable ego. I have seen pictures of Elvis Presley wearing a black belt with eight stripes on the end. If what I have read about his training is true, he deserved to be wearing a black belt. But eighth dan seems pretty excessive to me. The guy wasn’t even all that old when he died, the rank seems excessive simply based on his age, never mind his general deterioration as he got older that indicated he was not keeping up his training. Famous people often end up with sycophants in their retinue, ready to give them whatever they can to stroke the ego and stay in their good graces. I don’t know the circumstances around Elvis strapping on a belt with eight stripes. Maybe it was a sycophantic act, maybe it wasn’t. In the end, someone made the decision to bestow the rank and its none of my business. I have an opinion on the matter, but it isn’t for me to undo what someone else has done.

So hey, if someone wants to hand out black belts to students who complete a 12 week bootcamp, I guess it’s none of my business. I will worry about my own standards and others can worry about theirs.

Maybe I’m the fool for not grabbing ahold of this cash cow. Money has been tight for a while. I shall meditate on this…

 

[Hot Lunch]

Are they fully competent soldiers in that time, or minimally competent?

Competent enough for the nation to entrust them with its very existence. Even if I were to say "minimally competent," is it not generally agreed upon (outside of BJJ) that that's what 1st dan is supposed to be?

 

[Hot Lunch]

Where are you getting your greater than and less than values?

Look at all the things that I mentioned are learned in actual boot camp. When you add in the follow-on training, the multi-million dollar equipment that they're being trained to use. You're not learning how to use multi-million dollar equipment in a dojo. Getting a black belt doesn't put you in a position to have 332 million people depending on you to defend their freedom.

 

[skribs]

Wow, 12 weeks to become what we spent 4 to 8 years doing! You might as well buy your BB on eBay the students would be almost as skilled in martial arts as 12 weeks of training. This is hilarious .

Did you read more than the first sentence of the post?