Credentialing

[pdg]

Lower standards than practical and effective... such as poor and sloppy technique. vs Smooth refined polished technique that shows a high attention to detail burned into muscle memory.

let's say there are two Shodan, and they are testing for Nidan. one performs all the testing and when demonstrating his forms from kyu through shodan.... he executes with a mindless grace that shows he has spent thousands of hours drilling and polishing his technique. He is in peak condition.
and he could actually land his stuff in a self defense encounter. He isn't just prepared. He is ready.

The other guy demonstrates a basic proficiency.... but it looks like he is under a huge amount of mental and physical stress, and looks just gassed out from effort. And he is only half way into his test.
In the end... he completes his test... but there is an uncertainty, or uneasiness about him.
He is a cookie cutter BB.

Well that's obviously based on your expectation and interpretation of what a low dan black belt signifies.

I can think of more than a few arts where 1st - 3rd dan are "beginner" or "novice" level...

Getting a BB isn't the end goal that a lot of people think it should be, it's the start of phase two.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

And that black belt means different things to different people within a school, let alone an entire organization. I currently train with and have previously trained with black belts of varying physical skill and abilities. I’ve been around black belts who ‘weren’t very good’ who progressed significantly from day one, worked their butts off to get where they are, had significant physical limitations, etc. I currently and previously trained with people who had a ton of talent and a solid work ethic who held the same and/or lower rank than the other group.

Rank is an individual thing. Sure their can be standards, but they’re minimum standards and not maximum standards when applied.

If rank always equals ability, that means that every 3rd dan can beat every 2nd dan and lower every time; every 2nd dan would have to beat every 1st dan and lower, etc. Impossible, even for the highest regarded and praised ranking standards. If BJJ is the good standard in ranking (I think it’s about as close to a gold standard as I’ve seen), even they’re not close to truly attaining the impossible task of every higher rank beating every lower rank.

I'd modify that slightly to say that if rank equals ability, every 3rd dan can beat every 2nd dan more often than not. If rank were an re-evaluated thing, that would be possible (in other words, rank would indicate current ability). Rank has never, in my experience, been used that way. Everywhere I've been, it indicated highest level of achievement, even when it was meant to (mostly) indicate ability.

But, yeah, I've been learning over the last few years (especially here on MT) that rank means more than martial (or even "martial arts") ability. In many systems, it's also about what you've managed to do - and that means a given rank can mean different things, depending what the natural limitations of an individual are. I struggle (as an instructor) with how to honor achievement without giving away ranks too easily.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Lower standards than practical and effective... such as poor and sloppy technique. vs Smooth refined polished technique that shows a high attention to detail burned into muscle memory.

let's say there are two Shodan, and they are testing for Nidan. one performs all the testing and when demonstrating his forms from kyu through shodan.... he executes with a mindless grace that shows he has spent thousands of hours drilling and polishing his technique. He is in peak condition.
and he could actually land his stuff in a self defense encounter. He isn't just prepared. He is ready.

The other guy demonstrates a basic proficiency.... but it looks like he is under a huge amount of mental and physical stress, and looks just gassed out from effort. And he is only half way into his test.
In the end... he completes his test... but there is an uncertainty, or uneasiness about him.
He is a cookie cutter BB.

If the first person is naturally athletic, and the second struggles with coordination, the second may have worked harder and achieved more to get there. More to the point, if both actually meet the requirements for the rank, then I'm not sure I see any issue with both receiving the rank. You seem to be asserting that the mindless grace is what "should" be part of the requirements for nidan in this particular system. If it's not a stated/understood requirement, then does it matter, and how much?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Well that's obviously based on your expectation and interpretation of what a low dan black belt signifies.

I can think of more than a few arts where 1st - 3rd dan are "beginner" or "novice" level...

Getting a BB isn't the end goal that a lot of people think it should be, it's the start of phase two.

In some systems, more a start of phase three, but that's the same point, really.

 

[TSDTexan]

Well that's obviously based on your expectation and interpretation of what a low dan black belt signifies.

I can think of more than a few arts where 1st - 3rd dan are "beginner" or "novice" level...

Getting a BB isn't the end goal that a lot of people think it should be, it's the start of phase two.

I agree, in part. A shodan BB, as I was taught (3 decades ago) simply means one has mastered the basics. but there are a lot of folks who have not mastered their basics, with a number of stripes on their blackbelt. This is the lowered standards to which I refer.

 

[pdg]

I agree, in part. A shodan BB, as I was taught (3 decades ago) simply means one has mastered the basics. but there are a lot of folks who have not mastered their basics, with a number of stripes on their blackbelt. This is the lowered standards to which I refer.

I sort of agree in a way.

If you can't do the basics then you "shouldn't" get through the colour belts.

But on the flip side - it's not all about pure physical combat ability as compared to other students in most systems.

Personal improvement has to play a part, as does overcoming something like physical/medical challenges.

It's also about what you can do for the art.

Example: there's a woman at our club who is a 1st dan - to see her 'perform' it could be thought that she shouldn't have a BB around her waist.

But, she's great with the younger kids, she teaches well, she motivates well. She's someone who inspires them to keep turning up and to keep trying. At least a few of those kids will grow with the art and keep it alive.

Honestly, in my opinion she's more valuable to the art than a stuck up pretentious git of a 3rd dan fighter who belittles and alienates everyone who's not there to bleed and ends up in a club of one...

 

[TSDTexan]

If the first person is naturally athletic, and the second struggles with coordination, the second may have worked harder and achieved more to get there. More to the point, if both actually meet the requirements for the rank, then I'm not sure I see any issue with both receiving the rank. You seem to be asserting that the mindless grace is what "should" be part of the requirements for nidan in this particular system. If it's not a stated/understood requirement, then does it matter, and how much?

Well... it's a case by case based. But I can tell which students are putting in the time to drive home their lessons. And which ones never do their homework.

The mindless grace... a descriptor that I chose. It's another way to describe mushin or flow state.

And you aren't going to obtain it by simply attending class twice a week for one hour a session.

The point is.... if you can barely pass the proficiency bar at a testing.... how are you going to perform in a real world examination?

The stress of a real world fight is way way higher.

The strength of being able to relax and trust ones training... of being in the flow state or entering mushin is critically important. Dare I say... vital.

Being proficient under mild pressure, and being ready are not the same thing.

and yea.... standards are very subjective. But in the end... a martial art should prepare one to fight.

If a nidan has serious problems taking a 5th kyu belt... perhaps he or she should work on mastering what they already have been taught.

Just saying.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The point is.... if you can barely pass the proficiency bar at a testing.... how are you going to perform in a real world examination?

But you say here that they passed the proficiency bar for testing. That means they've met the requirements for that rank. I agree that this doesn't mean they're ready for a real-world altercation, but that doesn't mean they haven't met the rank standards...it just means that's not what the rank means.

If a nidan has serious problems taking a 5th kyu belt... perhaps he or she should work on mastering what they already have been taught.

That depends upon the 5th kyu, too, though. If the nidan is barely a nidan (met the requirements, but barely), or perhaps is aging and not physically what they once were, then they face a vigorous, aggressive, and athletic 5th kyu, it's not unreasonable that the 5th kyu has a chance there. Now, if a nidan (absent age and one-off honorary promotions) typically has problems handling 5th kyu students, that's a different matter.

And, of course, we also have to ask, in this hypothetical system, what's the difference in time typically between these points? I've seen a school where 18 months to shodan was pretty common, and nidan within a year after. That's less than 3 years of regular attendance (and probably some work outside class) to get to nidan. That's not a ton of time, and that athletic and aggressive 5th kyu (maybe a couple of months of training) could reasonably cause some problems.

 

[skribs]

I'd modify that slightly to say that if rank equals ability, every 3rd dan can beat every 2nd dan more often than not. If rank were an re-evaluated thing, that would be possible (in other words, rank would indicate current ability). Rank has never, in my experience, been used that way. Everywhere I've been, it indicated highest level of achievement, even when it was meant to (mostly) indicate ability.

But, yeah, I've been learning over the last few years (especially here on MT) that rank means more than martial (or even "martial arts") ability. In many systems, it's also about what you've managed to do - and that means a given rank can mean different things, depending what the natural limitations of an individual are. I struggle (as an instructor) with how to honor achievement without giving away ranks too easily.

I'm trying to find the best way to describe this. Basically, I intellectually understand martial arts a lot better than I can apply them. In the case of Taekwondo sparring, for example, I understand the concepts of the open and closed stance, and the most opportune targets based on your distance and orientation towards your opponent. But when I'm actually sparring it's like my wires get crossed and I have a hard time keeping up. I've never been that athletic, never had the hand-eye coordination for sports growing up, and I've always been small. I work 13+ hours a day, so I don't find much time to work out. I'm on the mat teaching a ton, but I don't have time to focus specifically on my muscles, which means that in addition to having spotty reaction times, I don't have the speed or strength to make up for it.

So there are lots of students that are lower dan rank than me, and some even that aren't black belts yet, that I'm sure could beat me in a sparring match. But even though I have trouble with the actual application, I have a better understanding of the curriculum and the science behind it than most, if not all of the other students at my school, and I am a much better instructor than most of them at my school (in large part because I've been heavily trained in instruction for the last 4 years and most of our other students have just started teaching little bits here and there).

I'm not trying to make excuses. I know what things I need to work on. I'm just saying that where I am right now, I am not the best fighter at my school, but I am one of the best teachers.

 

[hoshin1600]

as i read thru these last posts i feel as a society and martial community we expect ranking to express more than it has the ability to do so. as a result the meaning of rank is quite encompassing and fluid.

I struggle (as an instructor) with how to honor achievement without giving away ranks too easily.

rank means more than martial (or even "martial arts") ability.

i have been thinking about how to give recognition that matches the meaning behind the award. one option was a very defined meaning for the ranks and not everyone will get every rank. the colors of the belts will not be a linear progression. so a red belt will signify a warrior someone who can apply their art in combat. a black belt would signify someone who has a academic and full understanding of the material perhaps someone who is a good teacher.
the second thought would be to have military like award medals. so if someone was a full contact competitor he would get a certain medal, where as someone who takes a more spiritual path would get a different medal or some type of recognition that everyone in the organization would be able to identify and know what it signifies. this takes the place of a belt having to mean multiple things and could be a sole marker of the material one is working on and seniority. the only problem i have with some kind of medal system is how to display them while in class.

 

[skribs]

the second thought would be to have military like award medals. so if someone was a full contact competitor he would get a certain medal, where as someone who takes a more spiritual path would get a different medal or some type of recognition that everyone in the organization would be able to identify and know what it signifies. this takes the place of a belt having to mean multiple things and could be a sole marker of the material one is working on and seniority. the only problem i have with some kind of medal system is how to display them while in class.

I had a strange idea. I don't know if it's good or bad. It's not something I've really fleshed out. But it's an idea. The idea is you would be ranked differently for different aspects of the art, up to black belt. To get your 2nd degree black belt, you simply must have black belt rank in 2 aspects of the art.

Say your art includes curriculum for striking, grappling, knife fighting, and stick fighting, which will pretty much cover the majority of your improvised weapons (who carries around nunchucks or swords? who has easy access to a tire iron, baseball bat, or kitchen knife?). So you get your black belt in the striking course and in the knife course, and viola! 2nd degree!

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'm trying to find the best way to describe this. Basically, I intellectually understand martial arts a lot better than I can apply them. In the case of Taekwondo sparring, for example, I understand the concepts of the open and closed stance, and the most opportune targets based on your distance and orientation towards your opponent. But when I'm actually sparring it's like my wires get crossed and I have a hard time keeping up. I've never been that athletic, never had the hand-eye coordination for sports growing up, and I've always been small. I work 13+ hours a day, so I don't find much time to work out. I'm on the mat teaching a ton, but I don't have time to focus specifically on my muscles, which means that in addition to having spotty reaction times, I don't have the speed or strength to make up for it.

So there are lots of students that are lower dan rank than me, and some even that aren't black belts yet, that I'm sure could beat me in a sparring match. But even though I have trouble with the actual application, I have a better understanding of the curriculum and the science behind it than most, if not all of the other students at my school, and I am a much better instructor than most of them at my school (in large part because I've been heavily trained in instruction for the last 4 years and most of our other students have just started teaching little bits here and there).

I'm not trying to make excuses. I know what things I need to work on. I'm just saying that where I am right now, I am not the best fighter at my school, but I am one of the best teachers.

This is where I get into "rank isn't necessarily about fighting ability". As an instructor, your ability to teach (usually including your understanding of the principles) - your ability to help others do - is far more important than your ability to do. That's why an aging instructor can still be very valuable, even if he's well past his physical prime and cannot do some things he teaches. And at some point, ranks should probably reflect the changing priorities. Up to a point, I like for rank to indicate specific physical ability (with some allowance for different starting points). Beyond that point, I want to see continued improvement, effort, and understanding. Those will come with some increases in physical ability to fight, but that might be offset by what's lost to age, for instance. Where that change should be depends upon the curriculum and the aims of the school, but I think instructors should make it a conscious choice.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

as i read thru these last posts i feel as a society and martial community we expect ranking to express more than it has the ability to do so. as a result the meaning of rank is quite encompassing and fluid.





i have been thinking about how to give recognition that matches the meaning behind the award. one option was a very defined meaning for the ranks and not everyone will get every rank. the colors of the belts will not be a linear progression. so a red belt will signify a warrior someone who can apply their art in combat. a black belt would signify someone who has a academic and full understanding of the material perhaps someone who is a good teacher.
the second thought would be to have military like award medals. so if someone was a full contact competitor he would get a certain medal, where as someone who takes a more spiritual path would get a different medal or some type of recognition that everyone in the organization would be able to identify and know what it signifies. this takes the place of a belt having to mean multiple things and could be a sole marker of the material one is working on and seniority. the only problem i have with some kind of medal system is how to display them while in class.

That latter idea is something I've toyed with in the past. I tried to figure out a way to offer rank in NGA (technical rank for the core 50 classical techniques), rank for free sparring ability, and maybe weapons-related rank. The idea was just what you're referring to: someone might excel in one area and be limited in another, or might just only want to study one. Belt rank would have either been their NGA rank, their highest earned rank, or some composite rank. If I'd done the composite rank, there'd be some indicator of what areas they'd "qualified" in - shoulder patches or something showing areas they'd met some high standard in. If I had a larger program, it might have been worth figuring out how to handle that, but it just seemed like too much to bother with for my few students at a time.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I had a strange idea. I don't know if it's good or bad. It's not something I've really fleshed out. But it's an idea. The idea is you would be ranked differently for different aspects of the art, up to black belt. To get your 2nd degree black belt, you simply must have black belt rank in 2 aspects of the art.

Say your art includes curriculum for striking, grappling, knife fighting, and stick fighting, which will pretty much cover the majority of your improvised weapons (who carries around nunchucks or swords? who has easy access to a tire iron, baseball bat, or kitchen knife?). So you get your black belt in the striking course and in the knife course, and viola! 2nd degree!

That's an interesting concept. In your hypothetical system, would you want an indicator somehow for students to know which parts each person had earned their rank in? And would you do something different if someone ranked in every area of the system?

 

[wab25]

But I can tell which students are putting in the time to drive home their lessons. And which ones never do their homework.

Unless you know the starting point for each individual student, and their medical / mental / physical challenges... I don't think you can. I am working with a guy right now, that when he came in, he had done absolutely nothing in his life that resembled athletics or physical work at all. He has a degree, and works in the educational field at a school. When you get to know him, he has some mental and physical challenges, that are not readily apparent. When he first came, he could stand on the mat casually... I could mark an X on the floor with tape, and ask him to put his left foot on the X. It would take him 6 or 7 tries to get his left foot on the X. He comes regularly to class and we keep working with him. He is slowly learning, and slowly progressing. It would be very easy to come in and watch the class and look at the goofy dork over there and assume he needs to take it more seriously, or do his homework outside of class. They would miss the amount of effort and homework he has done, to get to where he is. The point is that different people have different challenges to overcome to gain physical fitness, to gain flexibility, to gain balance or strength or coordination or timing, or any one of the traits. I have found that it is very easy to snap judge someone... yet very hard to correctly judge them... especially without knowing them. A guy like him, I don't think will ever make our katas look smooth or effortless... or maybe not even combat ready. But, if he gets to the point where he can perform all the katas successfully, I know it will represent quite a bit more work than it would for the "average" person.

The point is.... if you can barely pass the proficiency bar at a testing.... how are you going to perform in a real world examination?

I have seen many black belts, from many styles, get into the octagon at get demolished, regardless of the standards held by their ranking boards. I have likewise seen successful MMA fighters get jumped in parking lots or convenience stores and get hospitalized by completely untrained thugs. But then some of those guys that got owned in the octagon where decorated special forces guys with combat experience...

I see black belt or any rank actually, as a personal thing. They are not meant to compare one person to another. Aside from telling you how much of a system they may have seen... they don't tell you much, until you get to know that person and their personal history.

 

[skribs]

That's an interesting concept. In your hypothetical system, would you want an indicator somehow for students to know which parts each person had earned their rank in? And would you do something different if someone ranked in every area of the system?

I'm not sure how I would denote each individual rank. It's just an idea at this point, and not a proposal. I am so far away from being competent at multiple disciplines it would be ludicrous for me to try and create my own.

At my Taekwondo school we also have Hapkido class, and we simply wear our Hapkido belt. So I wear my 2nd Dan belt 95% of the time there, and then the hour a week I do hapkido, I wear an orange belt. (And yes, the percentage is accurate). So there's one way.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'm not sure how I would denote each individual rank. It's just an idea at this point, and not a proposal. I am so far away from being competent at multiple disciplines it would be ludicrous for me to try and create my own.

At my Taekwondo school we also have Hapkido class, and we simply wear our Hapkido belt. So I wear my 2nd Dan belt 95% of the time there, and then the hour a week I do hapkido, I wear an orange belt. (And yes, the percentage is accurate). So there's one way.

That works well when the disciplines are separate like that (a friend with an NGA/BJJ school does that - there's a mass changing-of-belts between classes). In my curriculum (in its current state) they aren't separated, so I'd be doing something closer to the idea you posited earlier. Maybe someday it'll be worth me figuring out how to do.

 

[skribs]

That works well when the disciplines are separate like that (a friend with an NGA/BJJ school does that - there's a mass changing-of-belts between classes). In my curriculum (in its current state) they aren't separated, so I'd be doing something closer to the idea you posited earlier. Maybe someday it'll be worth me figuring out how to do.

It would be hard, especially because how do you keep track of what is what? Especially the more things you have.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It would be hard, especially because how do you keep track of what is what? Especially the more things you have.

Agreed. One thing that occurs is using belt stripes. So, perhaps 4 stripes on the belt, with each denoting level in a given area. Then the belts look like @drop bear’s gi.

 

[TSDTexan]

Unless you know the starting point for each individual student, and their medical / mental / physical challenges... I don't think you can. I am working with a guy right now, that when he came in, he had done absolutely nothing in his life that resembled athletics or physical work at all. He has a degree, and works in the educational field at a school. When you get to know him, he has some mental and physical challenges, that are not readily apparent. When he first came, he could stand on the mat casually... I could mark an X on the floor with tape, and ask him to put his left foot on the X. It would take him 6 or 7 tries to get his left foot on the X. He comes regularly to class and we keep working with him. He is slowly learning, and slowly progressing. It would be very easy to come in and watch the class and look at the goofy dork over there and assume he needs to take it more seriously, or do his homework outside of class. They would miss the amount of effort and homework he has done, to get to where he is. The point is that different people have different challenges to overcome to gain physical fitness, to gain flexibility, to gain balance or strength or coordination or timing, or any one of the traits. I have found that it is very easy to snap judge someone... yet very hard to correctly judge them... especially without knowing them. A guy like him, I don't think will ever make our katas look smooth or effortless... or maybe not even combat ready. But, if he gets to the point where he can perform all the katas successfully, I know it will represent quite a bit more work than it would for the "average" person.


I have seen many black belts, from many styles, get into the octagon at get demolished, regardless of the standards held by their ranking boards. I have likewise seen successful MMA fighters get jumped in parking lots or convenience stores and get hospitalized by completely untrained thugs. But then some of those guys that got owned in the octagon where decorated special forces guys with combat experience...

I see black belt or any rank actually, as a personal thing. They are not meant to compare one person to another. Aside from telling you how much of a system they may have seen... they don't tell you much, until you get to know that person and their personal history.

Actually...
I am fairly certain you would be wrong.
I have on a number of occasions spotted neurological abnormalities in an individual, prior to being directly informed. Ranging from a mild barely noticeable palsy, to an extremely high functioning autism spectrum individual.

I used to teach a version of Gracie's bullyproof jujitsu to a couple special needs halfway houses.
Not that I am saying I am fool proof, but it's been about a decade since I was surprised by physical learning disability/disorder in a student.

I think 95 percent of inspectors could achieve the same level of student awareness. It really isn't that hard.

The basis for my statement of telling who is doing their homework, requires some baseline observation.

I never start with the supposition that all the students are the same in skill acquisition rate. That though is only true in the most generic of senses. Skill acquisition falls on a bell curve.

Some only learn with herculean efforts, some are insanely gifted at learning, and then a large body of individuals in between.

The only fair way to ascertain how much progress or pushing through a student is doing... is to actually know that student well enough to know how fast he learns, and see his growth metrics.

The more an instructor does this the faster the ability becomes. Eventually you can do it without a lot of conscious thought.

Within three weeks, I can peg 15 students... and see who needs challenging, and see who is challenging themselves.

I can introduce a new form. Work on it in one class and at the next class I can immediately discern who was practicing it during the several day interval.

Even if it was just 30 minutes each day, I can see the difference.