Contradictions In The Martial Arts

[Hot Lunch]

In multiple Chinese and Japanese arts. My source would mostly be multiple articles from Inside Karate magazine which I used to read when it was being published. It stopped publication in 1999.

That's not gonna cut it, bro. "Multiple Chinese and Japanese arts" is not an art. Furthermore, I need some names of practitioners of these arts that have worn the clothing you have referred to.

You need to make a specific statement that you risk being proven right or wrong on. Not some vague statement that evades this risk.

 

[PhotonGuy]

That's not gonna cut it, bro. "Multiple Chinese and Japanese arts" is not an art. Furthermore, I need some names of practitioners of these arts that have worn the clothing you have referred to.

You need to make a specific statement that you risk being proven right or wrong on. Not some vague statement that evades this risk.

Well Im only telling you from what I know mostly from magazines that I would read on the history of the martial arts, mostly Inside Karate when it was being published. Whether or not you believe me on my claims that was my source. How about you? Have you done research on the history of colored belts? You did say that the idea for the black belt in the martial arts came partially from the black band that swimmers in Japan would wear. I used to be a competitive swimmer myself although not in Japan and we didn't wear any kind of bands or anything based on our skill level, we just wore colors depending on what team we were on (as with most team sports, different swim teams have different colors that represent them.) Maybe it's different in Japan about what swimmers would wear, I wouldn't know as I've never swam competitively in Japan. Do you have experience? Have you been to Japan and seen swimmers wearing certain bands? What's your source for your claims?

 

[PhotonGuy]

LOL, no. One of the hottest topics in martial arts are people who quit after getting their black belt.

Well I would also like to point out that if a student does quit right after making black belt, at least from what I've seen, they've stayed longer than most students as most students will quit way before making it to black belt. The martial arts has a very high turnover rate, that's just what I've seen with my experience having been to multiple dojos over the decades that I've been involved in the martial arts.

 

[Hot Lunch]

Have you done research on the history of colored belts?

What, do you think what I've said here on the matter is a bunch of crap that I pulled out of my other end? Nothing I've said here is anything that hasn't already been said dozens, if not hundreds, of times on this forum by others.

You're the only saying it existed before that. And if your reference is a martial arts mag, please bear in mind that Black Belt magazine presented Frank Dux's story as true in the early 1980's, and it wasn't until around the time that Bloodsport was released that they retracted the stories.

If you're going to challenge conventional wisdom on this subject, your sources on this will probably need to be peer-reviewed.

 

[PhotonGuy]

What, do you think what I've said here on the matter is a bunch of crap that I pulled out of my other end?

If it isn't than you should have no problem providing sources.

Nothing I've said here is anything that hasn't already been said dozens, if not hundreds, of times on this forum by others.

Alright, aside from your posts, when in this forum has it been said that the black belt is based on the black band that swimmers would wear? Who has said that besides you?

You're the only saying it existed before that.

And it has been said on this forum that Kano giving his more advanced students black belts back in Judo is not the entire story of the history of the belt system, its been said before on this forum although it was before you joined so you might've not seen it.

And if your reference is a martial arts mag, please bear in mind that Black Belt magazine presented Frank Dux's story as true in the early 1980's, and it wasn't until around the time that Bloodsport was released that they retracted the stories.

Yes that was before they knew that Frank Dux was a fraud, when they found out he was that's when they retracted the stories.

If you're going to challenge conventional wisdom on this subject, your sources on this will probably need to be peer-reviewed.

You have yet to provide any sources of your own.

 

[Hot Lunch]

If it isn't than you should have no problem providing sources.

Alright, aside from your posts, when in this forum has it been said that the black belt is based on the black band that swimmers would wear? Who has said that besides you?

And it has been said on this forum that Kano giving his more advanced students black belts back in Judo is not the entire story of the history of the belt system, its been said before on this forum although it was before you joined so you might've not seen it.

Yes that was before they knew that Frank Dux was a fraud, when they found out he was that's when they retracted the stories.

You have yet to provide any sources of your own.

Rather than continuing on with someone who's not playing with a full deck, I'll let you have this.

 

[PhotonGuy]

Because you said black belt is only the beginning. So before the beginning is... nothing.

Before black belt is brown belt.

 

[PhotonGuy]

Everything! Everything starts with the beginning.

That depends on what kind of beginning you're talking about, there are some beginnings that have stuff before them.

For example, the ninth grade is the beginning of high school, and before ninth grade there's eighth grade.

 

[ap Oweyn]

Do you not feel that this thread has drifted into the territory of weightless metaphor and pedantry?

Well the way I look at it, when you're a black belt you're a "serious" beginner. From my experience, most students are going to drop out before reaching black belt. There are different levels of being a beginner, you can be a beginner who is just starting out or you can be a more advanced beginner. Being a black belt would be like being a more advanced beginner so all the ranks before it would be earlier stages of being a beginner but the fact of the matter is that first degree black belt is a rather low rank when you look at all the dan ranks and in Japan the rank of first degree black belt is called Shodan which is literally translated as "low man," so there you have it.

The fact of the matter is that in the martial arts no matter what rank you've got or even if you want to throw rank out the window and just look at knowledge and skill, no matter how much you know and how skilled you are you can always learn more and you can always get better. So even the really high dan ranks can be seen as "beginner" ranks depending on your point of view.

But is that a useful definition of "beginner"? Yeah, there's always more to learn, but that's true of every human endeavour. We don't use that qualifier with other fields. We don't look at a university professor and say "they're a beginner," despite the fact that there's more to learn in their field of inquiry.

That saying is an old chestnut in martial arts circles. And I'm not a big fan of it. I'm not saying this is true in your case, but it feels like false humility in many cases. The sort that's really just a veiled way of saying "look what a good, humble martial artist I am."

Even on the low end of black belt timelines, say three years, that's enough time to gain some genuine skill and understanding. There are absolutely schools that issue black belts to people who lack both, but then the black belt isn't likely to be the beginning to anything meaningful for such people anyway. So let's assume we exclude that case.

Having said that, I get what you're saying. Getting the black belt is a milestone. And you're either going to recommit yourself to learning or you're going to say to yourself "no more worlds to conquer" and quit. I've seen both happen many times.

Personally, the metrics by which black belts are issued and maintained are so variable as to be very unreliable gauges of anything at all. But a black belt has either 1) attained some good experience or 2) convinced themselves that they have. Either way, they're unlikely to approach their training with a genuine "beginner's mindset." And that's fine. The former needn't do so, and the latter won't have the awareness to do so.

It's a symbol. And, like any other symbol, it can be honoured, co-opted, misinterpreted, etc. People know what they know. Better to look directly at that than to lean too heavily on tired metaphor.

 

[Hot Lunch]

That saying is an old chestnut in martial arts circles. And I'm not a big fan of it. I'm not saying this is true in your case, but it feels like false humility in many cases. The sort that's really just a veiled way of saying "look what a good, humble martial artist I am."

I don't think "black belt is only the beginning" is false humility; I just think it's something most of us have heard and repeated without it giving much thought.

"False humility" would be a mudansha saying "I don't care about belts," knowing good and damn well he does.

I typically don't buy the argument that "belts are for the instructor, not the student" - because there are cheaper, less wasteful ways to make things as equally easy for the instructors. For example, adding a stripe to the white belt for each kyu promotion all the way up to 1st kyu.

 

[ap Oweyn]

I don't think "black belt is only the beginning" is false humility; I just think it's something most of us have heard and repeated without it giving much thought.

"False humility" would be a mudansha saying "I don't care about belts," knowing good and damn well he does.

I typically don't buy the argument that "belts are for the instructor, not the student" - because there are cheaper, less wasteful ways to make things as equally easy for the instructors. For example, adding a stripe to the white belt for each kyu promotion all the way up to 1st kyu.

It's not necessarily false humility. As I said, I don't think that's the case in this conversation. But I said "in many cases." We can go back and forth on what "many" means. But, when I've seen it uttered by people at that level, it often rings false to me. People who HAVE a black belt and genuinely feel like it's just a beginning generally just get on with it, in my experience. It's the public declaration that feels suspect to me. But that's not a hill I feel like dying on.

But I agree with you completely that it's a thing that gets repeated without much thought.

 

[PhotonGuy]

Do you not feel that this thread has drifted into the territory of weightless metaphor and pedantry?
But is that a useful definition of "beginner"? Yeah, there's always more to learn, but that's true of every human endeavour. We don't use that qualifier with other fields. We don't look at a university professor and say "they're a beginner," despite the fact that there's more to learn in their field of inquiry.

A student might not call a university professor a beginner but lets say its a university professor whose just starting out on his career as a professor, other more experienced professors might call him a beginner as he is a beginner compared to them, he is a beginner at being a college professor. So he is a beginner from a certain point of view, as Obi Wan would put it.

That saying is an old chestnut in martial arts circles. And I'm not a big fan of it. I'm not saying this is true in your case, but it feels like false humility in many cases. The sort that's really just a veiled way of saying "look what a good, humble martial artist I am."

Well I've found out from my own experience that the more you know the more humble you become because you realize just how much there is that you don't know. Knowledge is like a balloon, the bigger the balloon gets the greater the outside surface area is. The air in the balloon and the size of the balloon is everything you know and what's outside the balloon is what you don't know, so as you learn more and more and your balloon gets bigger and bigger you realize just how much there is out there that you don't know.

Even on the low end of black belt timelines, say three years, that's enough time to gain some genuine skill and understanding. There are absolutely schools that issue black belts to people who lack both, but then the black belt isn't likely to be the beginning to anything meaningful for such people anyway. So let's assume we exclude that case.

I suppose it would depend on the dojo in which you got the black belt, every dojo has their own set of standards and requirements for the black belt and for all the belts.

Having said that, I get what you're saying. Getting the black belt is a milestone. And you're either going to recommit yourself to learning or you're going to say to yourself "no more worlds to conquer" and quit. I've seen both happen many times.

I've seen the former much more often than the ladder and in fact I've seen the ladder very very rarely. From my experience, many people quit at white belt or yellow belt and many don't past green belt but a student who makes it to black belt usually stays. Even if a student does quit right after making it to black belt they've still made it further than 99% of all the other students, this is just what I've seen maybe your experience is different.

Personally, the metrics by which black belts are issued and maintained are so variable as to be very unreliable gauges of anything at all. But a black belt has either 1) attained some good experience or 2) convinced themselves that they have. Either way, they're unlikely to approach their training with a genuine "beginner's mindset." And that's fine. The former needn't do so, and the latter won't have the awareness to do so.

From my experience, if and after you do make it to black belt. you start training even harder. You've gotten that far so you want to see just how much further you can go. Even if you aren't trying to earn any more rank you still might be trying to develop more skill.

It's a symbol. And, like any other symbol, it can be honoured, co-opted, misinterpreted, etc. People know what they know. Better to look directly at that than to lean too heavily on tired metaphor.

Yes it is a symbol and it can be a mark of achievement, depending on what it means to you,

 

[ap Oweyn]

A student might not call a university professor a beginner but lets say its a university professor whose just starting out on his career as a professor, other more experienced professors might call him a beginner as he is a beginner compared to them, he is a beginner at being a college professor. So he is a beginner from a certain point of view, as Obi Wan would put it.

For the record, I've worked in higher education for about 15 years now. I've never heard a professor refer to a less experienced professor as "beginner." They've accumulated a good amount of knowledge and skill just to get to that point in the first place. Which was the point of people upthread, to bring this back to martial arts.

To get to black belt (or whatever benchmark makes sense for a given style), you have accumulated a notable level of skill. (Again, depending on the school.) You're not a beginner. You're not done, but you're not a beginner.

Well I've found out from my own experience that the more you know the more humble you become because you realize just how much there is that you don't know. Knowledge is like a balloon, the bigger the balloon gets the greater the outside surface area is. The air in the balloon and the size of the balloon is everything you know and what's outside the balloon is what you don't know, so as you learn more and more and your balloon gets bigger and bigger you realize just how much there is out there that you don't know.

So, if we assume that there's always more to learn, no matter what field of endeavour we're discussing, doesn't that essentially make EVERYONE a beginner?

I suppose it would depend on the dojo in which you got the black belt, every dojo has their own set of standards and requirements for the black belt and for all the belts.

Right.

I've seen the former much more often than the ladder and in fact I've seen the ladder very very rarely. From my experience, many people quit at white belt or yellow belt and many don't past green belt but a student who makes it to black belt usually stays. Even if a student does quit right after making it to black belt they've still made it further than 99% of all the other students, this is just what I've seen maybe your experience is different.

I've been involved in martial arts since about 1983, and I've seen plenty of black belts move on. In some sense, I moved on myself (though that was more down to health issues than any sense that I'd finished). That's fine. Nobody signs a lifelong contract. Follow your bliss. But yes, you see a higher attrition rate among lower belts. Because there's more of them.

From my experience, if and after you do make it to black belt. you start training even harder. You've gotten that far so you want to see just how much further you can go. Even if you aren't trying to earn any more rank you still might be trying to develop more skill.

That definitely CAN be the effect. It's not universal though.

Yes it is a symbol and it can be a mark of achievement, depending on what it means to you,

So which is it? What achievement is it marking if you're still a beginner?

I'm not arguing that you're done when you get a black belt. I received mine in... 93, I think. It's not like I stopped. I'm simply saying that I don't find "black belt beginner" to be a particularly useful designator. Your mileage may vary.

 

[isshinryuronin]

So, if we assume that there's always more to learn, no matter what field of endeavour we're discussing, doesn't that essentially make EVERYONE a beginner?

Yes, but only if you see yourself as such. Not everyone who has gotten a black belt does. They may still practice their basics and kata, and even learn more technique and kata, but do they get better? Without a beginner's mind they do their MA the same way for years on end and their actual ability does not grow with their seniority.

To get to black belt (or whatever benchmark makes sense for a given style), you have accumulated a notable level of skill. (Again, depending on the school.) You're not a beginner.

By the time one gets 2nd degree black belt they have (hopefully) a "notable level of skill." They are not beginners in this regard. Using language as a metaphor, they are advanced in vocabulary and grammar and can win sport competitions and bar fights.

But there is another level, another curriculum out there in which they are just starting to realize exists (again, hopefully). There is another category of ability in which they are beginners - poetry, the use of their vocabulary and grammar to express themselves artistically. Iambic pentameter, illiteration, tintinnabulation, anaphora, rhythmic structure, and other terms most "advanced" English speakers don't know. Poetry is a whole different world beyond simple vocabulary and grammar.

I think this metaphor can be applied to TMA, exploring how to internalize and manipulate technique, understanding the historical principles and evolution of the art, discovering subtle biomechanical nuances to stretch one's already notable skill. Not to get too detailed or philosophical or dramatic in explaining what I'm getting at, the point is IMO there is a next level where one must see themselves as a beginner.

 

[HighKick]

For the record, I've worked in higher education for about 15 years now. I've never heard a professor refer to a less experienced professor as "beginner." They've accumulated a good amount of knowledge and skill just to get to that point in the first place. Which was the point of people upthread, to bring this back to martial arts.

To get to black belt (or whatever benchmark makes sense for a given style), you have accumulated a notable level of skill. (Again, depending on the school.) You're not a beginner. You're not done, but you're not a beginner.


So, if we assume that there's always more to learn, no matter what field of endeavour we're discussing, doesn't that essentially make EVERYONE a beginner?


Right.


I've been involved in martial arts since about 1983, and I've seen plenty of black belts move on. In some sense, I moved on myself (though that was more down to health issues than any sense that I'd finished). That's fine. Nobody signs a lifelong contract. Follow your bliss. But yes, you see a higher attrition rate among lower belts. Because there's more of them.


That definitely CAN be the effect. It's not universal though.


So which is it? What achievement is it marking if you're still a beginner?

I'm not arguing that you're done when you get a black belt. I received mine in... 93, I think. It's not like I stopped. I'm simply saying that I don't find "black belt beginner" to be a particularly useful designator. Your mileage may vary.

Your responses in regard to the replies to @PhotonGuy had times of contradiction but there were some good comments overall.
I am going to take a guess and say you have never been involved in KMA's very much. By in large, less emphasis is placed on belting, and the progression through the color belts is quite fast compared to CMA's, JMA's, and styles like BJJ. The exception of course is belt mills and schools who offer 'black belt' programs. But the result is the same: someone who is more of a beginner than an advanced student.
So, it is Very common to hear1st Dan students called 'serious beginners'. Often, these are people who have 2-3 years total time training. But remember, the actual training time will be varying number of hours. Some schools have a documented minimum required before testing, but I would say most do not, so this reinforces the 'beginner' label.

By in large, it is simply a phrase used to help keep people humble.

 

[Hot Lunch]

Your responses in regard to the replies to @PhotonGuy had times of contradiction but there were some good comments overall.
I am going to take a guess and say you have never been involved in KMA's very much. By in large, less emphasis is placed on belting, and the progression through the color belts is quite fast compared to CMA's, JMA's, and styles like BJJ. The exception of course is belt mills and schools who offer 'black belt' programs. But the result is the same: someone who is more of a beginner than an advanced student.
So, it is Very common to hear1st Dan students called 'serious beginners'. Often, these are people who have 2-3 years total time training. But remember, the actual training time will be varying number of hours. Some schools have a documented minimum required before testing, but I would say most do not, so this reinforces the 'beginner' label.

By in large, it is simply a phrase used to help keep people humble.

2-3 is not abnormal in JMA either. Despite what many say (5 to 6 years, etc).

For example, JKA has 10 kyu ranks, with testing every three months and six months time in grade from ikkyu to shodan. That puts you at two years and nine months to shodan, and that's assuming you started training the day after the previous test. In theory, you could start a week or two before the next test and be a yellow belt right there, which shaves off over two months.

ISKF only has nine kyu ranks, three months between tests, and a year time in grade from ikkyu to shodan, which puts it at exactly three years. Same deal with shaving off over two months if you start shortly before the yellow belt test.

If you look at the requirements for judo, it's not much different. There are less kyu ranks, but higher TIG requirements in both the USJA and USA Judo, which evens things out and puts shodan at about three years for both.

At my previous Kobayashi Shorin-ryu dojo, same thing. 13 kyu ranks. Yellow belt test was every week, 11th through 7th kyu tests were every month, 6th though 1st kyu every three months, and 6 months TIG for shodan. Although highly unlikely because of the high training hours requirements, you could make shodan there in only two and half years (e.g., eligibility for yellow belt was 15 training hours, which would take three weeks minimum to accumulate, unless you shelled out some $$$ for private training hours).

Aikido is the only JMA I'm aware of where "5-6 years" appears to be accurate.

This is why I've never scoffed at KMAs awarding black belts in 2-3 years. Because, first, it's really not much different in JMA. And second, because - as everyone else here as stated - black belts mean different things in different arts. One thing I'd definitely steer clear of is an insinuation that "my art is better than yours because it takes longer to get a black belt."

 

[PhotonGuy]

For the record, I've worked in higher education for about 15 years now. I've never heard a professor refer to a less experienced professor as "beginner." They've accumulated a good amount of knowledge and skill just to get to that point in the first place. Which was the point of people upthread, to bring this back to martial arts.

As I said, it all depends on your point of view. Lets say there's somebody who has a doctorate in chemical engineering, they've worked for a bunch of companies as a chemical engineer and now they've decided to teach so they take up a career as a professor in chemical engineering. When they first get started doing that they're not a beginner in chemical engineering but they are a beginner as a professor in chemical engineering.

To get to black belt (or whatever benchmark makes sense for a given style), you have accumulated a notable level of skill. (Again, depending on the school.) You're not a beginner. You're not done, but you're not a beginner.

It depends on what kind of "beginner" you're talking about. You could say a black belt is a beginner of the dan ranks even if they're not a beginner in the martial arts overall, just like a ninth grader is a beginner of high school but not a beginner of school.

So, if we assume that there's always more to learn, no matter what field of endeavour we're discussing, doesn't that essentially make EVERYONE a beginner?

From a certain point of view, yes.

As a matter of fact there are some martial arts instructors who hold high dan ranks who wear a double wide white belt, to symbolize the circular path of learning they've taken.

I knew of this one dojo where they said everybody was a white belt and that a black belt was just a white belt that had been dyed black, no matter what color your belt was on the surface beneath that it was white so everybody was a white belt in that sense.

The art of Jeet Kune Do, the art created by Bruce Lee which doesn't use belts but rather uses patches to denote rank, both the lowest patch and the highest patch is an empty circle, the philosophy is that after you gain all that knowledge, skill, and expertise you reach a new beginning.

I've been involved in martial arts since about 1983, and I've seen plenty of black belts move on. In some sense, I moved on myself (though that was more down to health issues than any sense that I'd finished). That's fine. Nobody signs a lifelong contract. Follow your bliss. But yes, you see a higher attrition rate among lower belts. Because there's more of them.

My experience has been different, I've seen some black belts move on but not that many, twice at my first dojo and once at the dojo Im at now I saw people get a black belt and right after that move on but that's all I've seen of that. The dojos that I've been to, though, you have to earn a black belt, they just don't hand them out. At belt factories where belts are handed out like candy, including the black belt, it might be different. I don't have any experience with those belt factories and I wouldn't waste my time at such places.

From what I've seen many people quit at white belt or after making yellow belt because the martial arts is just something they want to try out, they're just going through a phase to see what its like and they might decide its not for them and move on, or they might stay until they go up one belt and then move on.

That definitely CAN be the effect. It's not universal though.

That's my experience, although for others it might be different.

So which is it? What achievement is it marking if you're still a beginner?

That depends on what you see it as and that of course varies from person to person. As for it meaning that you're a beginner, that also depends on your point of view and what kind of beginner you're talking about, which varies as well.

I'm not arguing that you're done when you get a black belt. I received mine in... 93, I think. It's not like I stopped. I'm simply saying that I don't find "black belt beginner" to be a particularly useful designator. Your mileage may vary.

You're done when you're done and that varies from person to person, a lot. Some people decide they're done when they've just taken a few classes and they find out it's not their thing, but the fact remains that no matter how far you go you can always go further.

 

[Hot Lunch]

.

 

[ap Oweyn]

Yes, but only if you see yourself as such. Not everyone who has gotten a black belt does. They may still practice their basics and kata, and even learn more technique and kata, but do they get better? Without a beginner's mind they do their MA the same way for years on end and their actual ability does not grow with their seniority.

By the time one gets 2nd degree black belt they have (hopefully) a "notable level of skill." They are not beginners in this regard. Using language as a metaphor, they are advanced in vocabulary and grammar and can win sport competitions and bar fights.

But there is another level, another curriculum out there in which they are just starting to realize exists (again, hopefully). There is another category of ability in which they are beginners - poetry, the use of their vocabulary and grammar to express themselves artistically. Iambic pentameter, illiteration, tintinnabulation, anaphora, rhythmic structure, and other terms most "advanced" English speakers don't know. Poetry is a whole different world beyond simple vocabulary and grammar.

I think this metaphor can be applied to TMA, exploring how to internalize and manipulate technique, understanding the historical principles and evolution of the art, discovering subtle biomechanical nuances to stretch one's already notable skill. Not to get too detailed or philosophical or dramatic in explaining what I'm getting at, the point is IMO there is a next level where one must see themselves as a beginner.

See, I guess I don't see that as a beginner's mindset. It's precisely the knowledge and experience you've gathered that allows you to see old material in a new way. Your ability to focus on nuance and detail flows precisely from the fact that you're not a beginner. But we've strayed very much into semantics, so I'm happy to leave it there.

 

[ap Oweyn]

Your responses in regard to the replies to @PhotonGuy had times of contradiction but there were some good comments overall.
I am going to take a guess and say you have never been involved in KMA's very much. By in large, less emphasis is placed on belting, and the progression through the color belts is quite fast compared to CMA's, JMA's, and styles like BJJ. The exception of course is belt mills and schools who offer 'black belt' programs. But the result is the same: someone who is more of a beginner than an advanced student.
So, it is Very common to hear1st Dan students called 'serious beginners'. Often, these are people who have 2-3 years total time training. But remember, the actual training time will be varying number of hours. Some schools have a documented minimum required before testing, but I would say most do not, so this reinforces the 'beginner' label.

By in large, it is simply a phrase used to help keep people humble.

Fair. I get that. And I can't argue with your lived experience. That said (and assuming that KMA stands for Korean martial arts), that's not accurate. I have a background in ITF taekwondo. It was my first style (beyond a very brief stint in judo as a young kid in England). About 6 or 7 years, all told.