Do u like the idea of age 18 for a black belt?

[Deleted member 34973]

Really, it doesn't matter what any of us here on MT thinks. Your instructor feels that you are ready and that is all that matters. If he feels that you have earned it...you have.

 

[Hanzou]

Fortunately in Bjj you can't get a black belt until you're 18.

Also there's people in Bjj who simply don't want a black belt, because it is a tremendous responsibility on and off the mats. I don't think I've ever heard a story of someone begging for their black belt. Every black belt story I hear is some brown belt who wanders into class one day and their teacher throws a black belt at them. Afterwards, the new black belt sighs heavily and blurts out a few curse words.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Fortunately in Bjj you can't get a black belt until you're 18.

This is how it is now. It's only a matter of time before it goes the way of karate and business people who do not share the same value of what a belt is supposed to mean and represent.

I do now see BJJ being immune from something that all other martial arts have suffered from.

He isn't the first nor will he be the last.

 

[Steve]

This is how it is now. It's only a matter of time before it goes the way of karate and business people who do not share the same value of what a belt is supposed to mean and represent.

I do now see BJJ being immune from something that all other martial arts have suffered from.

He isn't the first nor will he be the last.

Bjj has a healthy and robust calibration system.

 

[drop bear]

i have no issue with it. we had a 16 year old veteran boxer who could take a class better than me. Because he knows more about the subject.

old people are not automatically more mature,better people,have more patience,or are better instructors.

That is based on individual merit.

This irritates me a bit as there seems to be this idea that if you do something a crap way long enough then it should be at some point be considered good.

 

[Hanzou]

Bjj has a healthy and robust calibration system.

Yeah, the level of contact required in Bjj makes it pretty hard to fake. Just about anyone with any experience with the art would know fairly quickly that you're a phony.

Pretending to be a Bjj black belt of all things is a pretty mighty hill to climb. Not only will people inquire about your lineage, they'll also want to roll with you. About the only way you could get away with it is if you live in the middle of nowhere and have like 2 students. Even then, I wouldn't put it past some Bjj guys to make a road trip just to choke out some phony black belt.

As for under 18 year old black belts in Bjj, I just don't see it happening. Again, Bjj is very contact heavy, and a 16 or 17 year old black belt is just going to be a massive walking target. Even the Gracie kids didn't get their black belts until 18, and Rener, Ryron, Ralek, etc. were extremely good.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Pretending to be a Bjj black belt of all things is a pretty mighty hill to climb. Not only will people inquire about your lineage, they'll also want to roll with you.

So if I start teaching BJJ at my school to kids, the kids will want to roll with me?

 

[Hanzou]

So if I start teaching BJJ at my school to kids, the kids will want to roll with me?

No, I'm saying that if you pretend to be a Bjj black belt and it gets out, you're going to arrive at your gym one day and find a few Bjj guys waiting for you.

 

[Steve]

So if I start teaching BJJ at my school to kids, the kids will want to roll with me?

I hope so. I routinely pad my W column by sparring with the kids in their class.

 

[Steve]

No, I'm saying that if you pretend to be a Bjj black belt and it gets out, you're going to arrive at your gym one day and find a few Bjj guys waiting for you.

Yeah, and it's also pretty well known locally who's legit and who isn't. And that has a lot to do with competition. It's not required that you are an IBJJF superstar, but you should be in the same stratosphere.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I like your post, Buka. Disagree a bit with this piece here. Belts are a sales mechanism. Black belt, in particular. It means something inside the system, sure. It's calibrated to that system's testing structure in some way.

However, it ALSO means something to the lay person considering training in that school (or often, considering signing up their child for lessons). "Black Belt" is an overt indication of proficiency and to the lay person it means mastery. Systems can deviate from this, and usually do. However, it is done with intention, and that intention, I believe, usually involves money.

The carrot dangled in front of students is the black belt. And once they achieve that, the value of the black belt is diminished by the system to keep that person paying dues.

There is a psychology to video game design that takes advantage of this very same phenomenon. You give the person a goal. They perform tasks to get enough loot to buy the equipment to achieve the goal, only to find that once they do, that goal was meaningless. There is a new goal, and new fees, which require more loot, which leads to a revelation and a new goal... and more fees.

I think the most honest way to do things is to have junior or juvenile ranks, and a completely different set of senior or adult ranks. And then, when a person gets to a certain age, there needs to be a way to step from one ranking system to the other.

While I agree this is true in some schools and organizations, I think you're giving too much credit for sales acumen to most instructors. In my experience, most instructors are more concerned with their reputation as creators of good black belts (as their chosen association defines them) than almost anything else. Those with that motivation won't give away black belts to generate sales.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I don't think I could agree with you more, Steve. Seems spot on to me.

It didn't really apply to us, what we were doing. I never charged a testing fee. Charged the four bucks for the belt for a while, but dropped that after a couple years. I figured they had paid enough in sweat.
The longer you trained in my dojo, the less you paid. It was part of a planned progression. Black belts either paid ten bucks a month, or nothing if they helped out. I don't mean by teaching, which some of them did as I considered them qualified to do so. But the ones that didn't teach either had to help clean or help out in another way. Provide a ride for someone once in a while, spread the word about seminars, courses, paint when it was needed, whatever, but help in some way. Some were just too damn busy to do anything, so they jut paid the ten bucks, gladly, trying to help the gym.

I never believed in Junior ranks. Might rethink that if I was doing it again, probably a good idea. At least up until Black. I could never, in good conscious, promote a kiddy black belt.

Everyone knew exactly what our policy was - no guarantee of any belt promotion what-so-ever, no matter how long you trained. Nobody seemed to care. (as far as I knew, anyway)

I'll tell you one thing I'd do differently. EVERYONE would pay. I had so many kids that were from one parent families they just couldn't afford it. So I let them come for free. Even provided them with used gis. Always told students that if they quit, please donate your gi to the gym, somebody will need it that can't afford it. (We had a whole closet and cabinet full of them, it was pretty awesome)

Here's a strange thing. I had a policy in place for fifteen years. All cops, fire fighters and EMTs trained for free. When I turned the gym over to my long time partner, the first thing he did was charge cops. (he was a Boston cop) You know what happened? The amount of cops increased by threefold. Go figure. Maybe they figured if it was free, it wasn't any good, I don't know. Never could figure that one out.

I never thought about decreasing the amount as people progress. I've made a policy of never raising a student's fees, so those who start early have lower rates (whatever I was charging at the time they joined), but I never thought of finding a way to remove fees as folks get to that vaunted black belt. I like that idea. Thanks for sharing, @Buka .

 

[drop bear]

I hope so. I routinely pad my W column by sparring with the kids in their class.

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&...wIGzAA&usg=AFQjCNEXqVhfVLmviCOdE1rcnuYRxYNB1A

 

[Gerry Seymour]

i have no issue with it. we had a 16 year old veteran boxer who could take a class better than me. Because he knows more about the subject.

old people are not automatically more mature,better people,have more patience,or are better instructors.

That is based on individual merit.

This irritates me a bit as there seems to be this idea that if you do something a crap way long enough then it should be at some point be considered good.

In most curricula, the time in grade isn't an absolute - it's a minimum. Someone training for X years isn't guaranteed a rank, but they are (in many schools) guaranteed not to exceed X rank. The testing and other criteria are there to ensure they have the requisite skill for whatever that rank is intended to be.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I have a couple issues with what have been said so far. The first is the idea that black belt means you can teach. As has been mentioned a couple of times, you can have a black belt and not teach. You can have a black belt and that just means you have he basics, which everyone appears to agree is all right.

You can also have a black belt and have that mean you know a decent amount in the system, you have a large level of technical expertise, but not have it mean you can teach. Some systems wont have teaching until a later dan, and some will have ability to teach as something separate from what dan you have. In those situations, I still believe that you can get bb under 18...some people will train from 5 years old, and by the time they are 16 or 17, they have more knowledge than someone who started at 30 and gets black belt at 33-35 (assuming 3-5 years normally for bb). Even if you discount most of their earlier years, they've had the basics ingrained in them and looking purely at amount of time training, they've got 3-4 times that of the older guy. How serious they were throughout the time is definitely important, but the more serious students should be able to have technical expertise of pre-dan materials.

If you consider black belt a rank where you can now teach, this is the only time it gets tricky to me. There are some people who should never be able to teach. They may know all the material, and be an amazing fighter and martial artist, but just don't have any aptitude to teach. By that logic, they will never reach black belt. There are some people I know who are 16 or 17, whom I would be perfectly fine learning their system from (mainly in grappling since I suck at that, but also in striking and my main art). Are they (the ones I know whom are 16/17/18 and also first dan) better martial artists than me? Possibly, but overall probably not if I'm being perfectly honest. Are they at a level where they can notice what I am doing incorrectly, point it out to me? Yes. Do they each have areas where they are better than me and I could learn from them? Absolutely. Would I prefer to learn from them than some people I know of a higher rank whom are also older? Absolutely.

That last point is the only one IMO that should be contentious. Some people probably think they don't have enough experience or are not mature enough to teach. My response to that is: put your ego aside. Your age does not mean they have nothing to teach you about a specific skill. Being more mature than them does not make them any less capable as a martial artist. Being more experienced than them in life does not mean they are less experienced when it comes to fighting, being in a ring, or that particular martial art. If you can accept this and allow them to teach you, you may learn something. Only exception to this that I can think of is if you are significantly better than them to the point where you should be teaching them, but if you're at that point you probably shouldn't be learning from a first dan of any age.

 

[JowGaWolf]

No, I'm saying that if you pretend to be a Bjj black belt and it gets out, you're going to arrive at your gym one day and find a few Bjj guys waiting for you.

ohhhh ok. sorry about that. I got it now.

 

[JR 137]

I agree with most of what's been said, but honestly I find what's been stated as the differences between adults and 16ish year olds a bit too idealistic. I know too many adults that don't possess all or even a few of those characteristics.

As far as black belts and teaching, not all black belts can nor should teach. A lot of adults just don't possess that quality. I agree that a 1st dan should be able to work with a colored belt student or two individually to help them polish up technique or walk and talk them through stuff, but there's a huge difference between running a class for an hour or two and helping a lower ranked student out. There are several 2nd-4th dans I train with that are excellent karateka and no one would question their rank that don't teach because they wouldn't be very good teachers. They're very good at helping people like me when I ask (and even when I don't ask), but they wouldn't run a full class very effectively. Just throwing them the keys and saying "see you next week" wouldn't be the best choice my CI could make. They wouldn't do anything inappropriate by any means, but class would be awful. I do think however that if someone is at or near master level, they must be able to effectively teach and run their own dojo. Not from a running a business standpoint, but purely from a teaching standpoint.

Would I have been ready to be a black belt at 16 or 12 or younger if I was training back then (assuming this wasn't some black belt mill)? If my hypothetical teacher thought so, then yes. My rank is my rank; my name is (or was when I was a black belt) on my belt for a reason - it's mine. I know what I put into it. I defined my rank, it didn't define me. If an unworthy schmuck standing next to me in class has a few more stripes on his or her's, it doesn't downgrade mine. If someone with far more skill and knowledge had less stripes on their's, it doesn't make mine any better.

@Buka i really like your standard of having to defend against a full grown man. Knowing your track record here, I'm pretty confident that that was one of many prerequisites. Not that I'm saying you're wrong by any means, but what about someone who all the training in the world won't get them to be able to defend against a full grown black belt man? Would a 4'10 85 lb woman who trained hard day in and day out, and could easily hold her own against any average sized woman with respectable skill not be worthy of a black belt if she couldn't fully defend against the 5'10 185 lb guys? What about a 4'10 100 lb guy who could go toe to toe with any guy up to 6" taller and 50 lb heavier? I'm most likely wrong in my assumption, but it seems like some people have nearly no chance.

@FlamingJulian - if your teacher thinks you're ready, you're ready. Go earn it!

 

[Juany118]

I have a couple issues with what have been said so far. The first is the idea that black belt means you can teach. As has been mentioned a couple of times, you can have a black belt and not teach. You can have a black belt and that just means you have he basics, which everyone appears to agree is all right.

You can also have a black belt and have that mean you know a decent amount in the system, you have a large level of technical expertise, but not have it mean you can teach. Some systems wont have teaching until a later dan, and some will have ability to teach as something separate from what dan you have. In those situations, I still believe that you can get bb under 18...some people will train from 5 years old, and by the time they are 16 or 17, they have more knowledge than someone who started at 30 and gets black belt at 33-35 (assuming 3-5 years normally for bb). Even if you discount most of their earlier years, they've had the basics ingrained in them and looking purely at amount of time training, they've got 3-4 times that of the older guy. How serious they were throughout the time is definitely important, but the more serious students should be able to have technical expertise of pre-dan materials.

If you consider black belt a rank where you can now teach, this is the only time it gets tricky to me. There are some people who should never be able to teach. They may know all the material, and be an amazing fighter and martial artist, but just don't have any aptitude to teach. By that logic, they will never reach black belt. There are some people I know who are 16 or 17, whom I would be perfectly fine learning their system from (mainly in grappling since I suck at that, but also in striking and my main art). Are they (the ones I know whom are 16/17/18 and also first dan) better martial artists than me? Possibly, but overall probably not if I'm being perfectly honest. Are they at a level where they can notice what I am doing incorrectly, point it out to me? Yes. Do they each have areas where they are better than me and I could learn from them? Absolutely. Would I prefer to learn from them than some people I know of a higher rank whom are also older? Absolutely.

That last point is the only one IMO that should be contentious. Some people probably think they don't have enough experience or are not mature enough to teach. My response to that is: put your ego aside. Your age does not mean they have nothing to teach you about a specific skill. Being more mature than them does not make them any less capable as a martial artist. Being more experienced than them in life does not mean they are less experienced when it comes to fighting, being in a ring, or that particular martial art. If you can accept this and allow them to teach you, you may learn something. Only exception to this that I can think of is if you are significantly better than them to the point where you should be teaching them, but if you're at that point you probably shouldn't be learning from a first dan of any age.

The problem is, as was also said, it depends on the School. In mine black belt (level 10) is, in essence, an assistant instructor. Before that we have no belts. After that it is varying degrees of red belt, which is the level where the contract we all sign kicks in which says "you will not be an independent Guro for "X" years after achieving said status.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Tbh I even have issue with it being just based on skill in any school. I see MA as a way to defend oneself and harm others. That requires a maturity I have never seen someone under 20 odd years with that maturity to make those decisions solo.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

The problem is, as was also said, it depends on the School. In mine black belt (level 10) is, in essence, an assistant instructor. Before that we have no belts. After that it is varying degrees of red belt, which is the level where the contract we all sign kicks in which says "you will not be an independent Guro for "X" years after achieving said status.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Tbh I even have issue with it being just based on skill in any school. I see MA as a way to defend oneself and harm others. That requires a maturity I have never seen someone under 20 odd years with that maturity to make those decisions solo.

I'm not fully sure I understand the ranking system in your school, so not going to comment on that.
However, are you suggesting at the end that no one under 20 years old have the maturity to use MA purely to defend themselves? I know plenty of people under 20, in martial arts, who would never do anything to actively hurt another unless they are defending themselves. I also know plenty of people above 20 who would fight at the drop of a hat. If that is your criteria, age should not be a limiting factor.

 

[Juany118]

I'm not fully sure I understand the ranking system in your school, so not going to comment on that.
However, are you suggesting at the end that no one under 20 years old have the maturity to use MA purely to defend themselves? I know plenty of people under 20, in martial arts, who would never do anything to actively hurt another unless they are defending themselves. I also know plenty of people above 20 who would fight at the drop of a hat. If that is your criteria, age should not be a limiting factor.

First my school (FMA, some schools there have NO belts). You go 1-9, no belt. Level 10 you get black. After that you do Red, which is Guro (Sifu/Sensei etc). So think Red as black with multiple dans but we just call em levels.

My point is I have actually been in decision making situations for self defense. I have also responded to calls of people who were responding to such situations. Half the adults used over kill to defend themselves and in over 18 years I have yet to respond to a teenager who didn't use over kill... over kill risking arrest.

I can also, if you wish, point you to the neuroscience that proves that teenagers are far less risk adverse and those prone to such poor decisions. Plenty of links on that one.

My point is that it's dicey enough with adults, now add the lack of maturity when it comes to teenagers and yeah...