So to your way of thinking, mastery requires both physical and intellectual excellence. Would you say true mastery is weighted more towards one or the other? Or does it require the highest levels of skill at both performance and teaching?
Myths of the Martial Arts: A Black Belt Is a Master
- Thread starter seasoned
- Start date
So to your way of thinking, mastery requires both physical and intellectual excellence. Would you say true mastery is weighted more towards one or the other? Or does it require the highest levels of skill at both performance and teaching?
dancingalone
Grandmaster
There is a published guideline for the JKA which would lead you to believe that. This is another one of those what is in the book and then what is there in real life situations. JKA-certified instructors vary on what they require in their own dojo, and indeed those are MINIMUM guidelines that represent a very aggressive promotion path. Anecdotally, I believe most take longer than 10 years, certainly the people I know did,
I am a member of the USAF which is aligned with the Aikikai, headed by the Ueshiba family. These are the USAF requirements.
6th kyu - 20 practice days
5th kyu - 40 practice days after 6th kyu
4th kyu - 80 practice days after 5th kyu
3rd kyu - 100 practice days after 4th kyu
2nd kyu - 200 practice days after 3rd kyu
1st kyu - 300 practice days after 2nd kyu
1st dan - 300 practice days after 1st kyu
2nd dan - 600 practice days after 1st dan - not less than 2 years after shodan
3rd dan - 700 practice days after 2nd dan - not less than 3 years after nidan
These are officially recorded dojo attendance days. If I attended 2 different sessions in the same day, I'd still only get credit for one day. Also considering that most aikido dojo are not open 365 days a year you can see the difficulty in meeting those TIG requirements. Add to that the generally high standards in aikido where you are invited to test when you know the techniques rather than just ticking off the time....Well, I don't personally know anyone within my band of aikido training experience to my knowledge who made yondan very quickly.
I understand this is a stray internet conversation. Nonetheless, I don't think the statement was necessarily accurate so I wanted to speak up.
dancingalone
Grandmaster
I lean towards the physical side if you're making me pick. Of course it depends on the art, but I believe all this intellectual and spiritual quest stuff is a recent development. I am certain there were tremendous martial artists before the likes of Itosu and Funakoshi began to ponder the usages of Te in creating people of sound body and good character.
rframe
Green Belt
Just to provide some more examples:
In our Shotokan association we have a systematic grading system and promotion is primarily competency based, this typically results in 5 years for Shodan for a fairly committed student.
An additional 2 years for 2nd degree.
3rd takes an additional 3-5 years.
While 4th takes an additional 4-6 years from your 3rd dan.
5th may take another 10 years and is the first considered a "master" level.
A few examples I can think of in our school: 5th dan with 26 years, 2 dan with 17 years, 2 dan with 10 years, 1st dan with 7 years
According to WKF homologated dan requirements, 4th requires a minimum of 11 years experience and being over 30 years old, while 5th requires a minimum of 16 years.
Champ-Pain
Blue Belt
The following thought is only my opinion...
Some lower dans have superior skills than some higher ones. I know some 5th and even 6th dan that have never won more than a few matches in competition but their knowledge of the art they practice is great. I also know some very good competitors who hold a 1st or 2nd dan in the art they train in and are superior fighters than most who are ranked higher than themselves, but know relatively little about the history and traditions of their particular art. Now, as far as being a "Master" - I save that particular title for slave owners and I refuse to call anybody by such. I prefer Sensei, Sabomnim or Sifu. Sir is also good.
Some lower dans have superior skills than some higher ones. I know some 5th and even 6th dan that have never won more than a few matches in competition but their knowledge of the art they practice is great. I also know some very good competitors who hold a 1st or 2nd dan in the art they train in and are superior fighters than most who are ranked higher than themselves, but know relatively little about the history and traditions of their particular art. Now, as far as being a "Master" - I save that particular title for slave owners and I refuse to call anybody by such. I prefer Sensei, Sabomnim or Sifu. Sir is also good.
As others have said, rank and mastery are really two different, possibly unrelated, things. Rank reflects your social position within an organization or group. Mastery is indicative of and assess skill and understanding of a thing. Rank may be reflective of a degree of mastery, or it may be a reflection of service to the organization. Rank can even be awarded in advance of skill development to serve the purposes of the organization.
Black belt and degrees of black belt as assessment and measures of skill are especially tricky. It's hard to define "skill" or "understanding" across different arts in the first place; is it knowing 10 kata/forms, or 9 punches, or 91 kicks, or being able to beat 10 people? Is it one year or 12 years of training? Is it 100 classes or ten thousand? Is it being able to respond with the patterns -- or transcend them, and use the principles to freely respond?
Black belt and degrees of black belt as assessment and measures of skill are especially tricky. It's hard to define "skill" or "understanding" across different arts in the first place; is it knowing 10 kata/forms, or 9 punches, or 91 kicks, or being able to beat 10 people? Is it one year or 12 years of training? Is it 100 classes or ten thousand? Is it being able to respond with the patterns -- or transcend them, and use the principles to freely respond?
The way that I'm reading what you wrote, it looks like about four years to shodan plus a minimum of five to sandan.
Thank you for posting this, by the way.
So based on what you've written, your school would be a minimum of about eight years to sandan and about twelve years to yondan, with eleven for the WKF homologated dan requirements.
So if you have rougly a ten to twelve year minimum, you're fourth or third and partway to fourth (presuming minimum times). And barely a first in BJJ if the ten year number is accurate (so far, no BJJ folks have chimed in to say that it isn't, and at least one read my initial post).
So yes, I'd say that a shodan in BJJ is probably much closer to 'expert' than it is in any of the other arts that have been mentioned so far.
So Dancingalone, do you have any comment on my initial multiple paragraph post that was focused on the OP, or were you only concerned with an off the cuff comment that I made to Steve?
Last edited:
dancingalone
Grandmaster
I suppose a person CAN make it to shodan in that period of time if they attend a dojo that is open Mon-Sat and they are diligent about training. Few do whether do to lack of training opportunities or personal circumstances. In other words, it's very much incorrect to read those minimum requirements and then conclude that it takes 4 years to make shodan in aikido. I'd say around 6-7 years is a closer guesstimate for most in my experience. Same deal when you look at karate requirements, particularly those that haven't been infected by the McDojo syndrome. The minimum time requirements are more for exceptional people rather than the rank-and-file.
I did read it. It falls in line with what you've stated on previous occasions on what you feel a 1st dan means. I have nothing to comment further there that I haven't stated before.
Sorry if I've offended you by pointing out that people within kyu/dan based systems in my experience take considerably longer than 10 years to attain yondan. I didn't do so with that intention - more to present a counterview for anyone else reading.
Then you missed the major point of my comment about the article, which is that the author ties being expert strictly to mastery of gross motor skills and the advanced beginner to lack of initiation with regards to conceptual knowledge.
It doesn't matter what my opinion is about what a first dan means: the author's statement doesn't make sense. The 'expert in basic gross motor skills of martial moves' may have shallow conceptual knowledge. The 'advanced beginner who is only just beginning to understand concepts of the art' may be an excellent technician. So using the one to denote an expert and the other to denote an advanced beginner is ridiculous.
No offense was taken; others' comments and statement that I have read and/or heard over the years regarding time in grade in various arts led me to my comment to Steve. If it isn't your experience, it isn't your experience.
However, it surprises me that, in presenting a counterpoint, you hadn't commented on this quote from the article:
Most of the traditional instructors I know maintain that a person becomes a true expert by the time he reaches third degree, which is for many arts the point at which a person can begin teaching.
Do you think that third dan equates to a true (presuming that he means 'actual') expert?
Steve
Mostly Harmless
I'd say 8 to 12 years for black belt is still very much the norm. Some go faster. Others go slower.
While there are exceptions, the technical rules are a minimum of 2 years between blue and purple, 1 1/2 years between purple and brown, and 1 year between brown and black.
I'm a purple belt and have been training for 5 1/2 years.
Regarding competition, you don't have to compete to earn rank. Some schools emphasize competition more than others, but it's an important component in all legit BJJ schools. Those who compete will have more opportunity to demonstrate technical ability, but it's not necessarily going to mean quicker promotions. That depends upon the players involved as well as the coach.
dancingalone
Grandmaster
I didn't read the author''s words that way. He's simply describing two competing interpretations of what a shodan is. 1) The shodan is someone that is physically skilled in the basics or 2) The shodan is an advanced beginner who has been exposed to the foundations of his art and he is just starting to understand the principles that will later make him an expert if mastered.
That seems like a reasonable enough encapsulation of the BB = expert or not argument discussed frequently here on MT.
Steve
Mostly Harmless
for what it's worth, I would say that "someone who is physically skilled in the basics" equates to an experienced blue belt or possibly a purple belt in BJJ. For most, this would be about 3 to 5 years. As I said, I've been at it for 5 1/2 years and I'd have no problem saying I'm an advanced beginner.
dancingalone
Grandmaster
I must say I like that approach.
dancingalone
Grandmaster
Just noticed this addition. I'd say the answer depends on how you define 'expert' and obviously this depends in great deal on the system we are discussing.
Speaking generically, I think an expert should be know the entirety of his system and he should have one or more aspects in which he displays exceptional quality or skill in. Whether that comes at 3rd dan or not is entirely up to how the system's curriculum is structured. I think Mr. Weiss and Mr. Spiller have written that in ITF Taekwon-Do 7th dan is considered master level because that is when the entirety of the system is learned. Upon reflection that actually is quite logical if we isolate the discussion to only the actual study of TKD and do not consider political or honorary appointments or the too frequent reality that rank does not match skill.
Since the question was asked, I'd thought I'd confirm that a) time to first degree black belt* in BJJ is probably around 10 years on the average and b) promotion from white up through black is primarily based on mat ability. You get your purple belt when you start dominating the other blue belts and hanging in there with many of the purple belts. You get your brown belt when you start dominating the other purple belts and hanging in there with the brown belts, etc.
A caveat to the above is that most instructors aren't going to promote too far based on athletic ability alone. If you dominate other students at your rank level just by virtue of being stronger and in better shape than everybody else, that won't necessarily get you promoted if you don't have the technique to go along with your athleticism.
Some people do go through the ranks faster based on natural ability and the amount of work they put in. If you train 2 classes per day, 5 days per week, you'll progress a lot faster than someone who shows up for 3 classes per week.
The converse is true as well. I've been training BJJ for more than 10 calendar years, but once you subtract all the time I've spent out of the gym due to injuries, illnesses, and budget problems my total time in the art is more like 7 years. I'm almost 48 years old and naturally non-athletic. I got my purple belt last year and that was the right time for me. I can roll evenly with the other purple belts in the gym and dominate the blue belts, even though most of them are 20 years younger than I am. Purple belt is a long way from "mastery", but I can honestly say that my BJJ purple belt represents much more hard work and earned ability than both of my black belts from a couple of previous arts put together (Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu and an eclectic kickboxing system, if anyone's curious - nothing very impressive, I know.)
*I don't know of anyone in BJJ who uses the Japanese "dan" terminology. The Brazilians would call it a "faxia preta" and the Americans just say "black belt".
A caveat to the above is that most instructors aren't going to promote too far based on athletic ability alone. If you dominate other students at your rank level just by virtue of being stronger and in better shape than everybody else, that won't necessarily get you promoted if you don't have the technique to go along with your athleticism.
Some people do go through the ranks faster based on natural ability and the amount of work they put in. If you train 2 classes per day, 5 days per week, you'll progress a lot faster than someone who shows up for 3 classes per week.
The converse is true as well. I've been training BJJ for more than 10 calendar years, but once you subtract all the time I've spent out of the gym due to injuries, illnesses, and budget problems my total time in the art is more like 7 years. I'm almost 48 years old and naturally non-athletic. I got my purple belt last year and that was the right time for me. I can roll evenly with the other purple belts in the gym and dominate the blue belts, even though most of them are 20 years younger than I am. Purple belt is a long way from "mastery", but I can honestly say that my BJJ purple belt represents much more hard work and earned ability than both of my black belts from a couple of previous arts put together (Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu and an eclectic kickboxing system, if anyone's curious - nothing very impressive, I know.)
*I don't know of anyone in BJJ who uses the Japanese "dan" terminology. The Brazilians would call it a "faxia preta" and the Americans just say "black belt".
Regarding timelines...
In the American Bando Association, it's a minimum of 5 years training to test for the First Level of Achievement (black belt). After that, it's 3 years between each ranking (minimum) until the Sixth Level, after which it's 10 years. So, to reach Third Level, you're looking at a minimum of 11 years. Functionally, most seem to average around 7 years for First Level, adding 2 years or so to the total time. Again, not everyone tests "on schedule." For example, I chose for several years not to test, in what was really a "cut off my nose to spite my face" bit of a move.
In the American Bando Association, it's a minimum of 5 years training to test for the First Level of Achievement (black belt). After that, it's 3 years between each ranking (minimum) until the Sixth Level, after which it's 10 years. So, to reach Third Level, you're looking at a minimum of 11 years. Functionally, most seem to average around 7 years for First Level, adding 2 years or so to the total time. Again, not everyone tests "on schedule." For example, I chose for several years not to test, in what was really a "cut off my nose to spite my face" bit of a move.
OP
OP
Good point, I also feel the same pertaining to any given art. To Master the art is two fold, consisting of technique and extensive knowledge of that art.......... I would also add that age requirement is a must, combining technique, knowledge, wisdom and maturity.
My next door neighbor is a Relson black belt. He took 16 years to get to black, although he did take some time off in the middle somewhere. We were having discussions about belt ranks and I told him that a comparison of taekwondo and jiujitsu ranks came out to roughly (but not exactly) that BJJ blue belt = tkd 1st dan, BJJ purple belt = tkd 2nd dan, BJJ brown belt = tkd 3rd dan, and a BJJ black belt = a tkd 4th dan. Roughly, not exactly. I don't know if the pattern holds true for the higher dan ranks.
Steve
Mostly Harmless
Hey, side note, one of the guys I train with (sherriff's deputy) started with Relson Gracie in Hawaii. He got to blue belt there, I believe, then moved to Washington. He's a brown belt now.
I don't know about the correlation between master and belt rank, but to me, generally speaking, what people generally conceive of being a "master" is in my opinion, someone who has enough understanding that they can continue their journey primarily on their own. That doesn't mean this person can isolate himself or no longer needs a teacher or mentor, but rather, this level of practitioner requires the freedom to explore his/her own path, rather than follow someone's elses. Sort of like when you move out of your parents' home and build your own home.
