Time to get to BB

[dancingalone]

Why is that important, how other martial arts practitioners judge Taekwondo?

I think it matters from a commercial studio perspective. Negative word-of-mouth 'advertising' gets around quickly and it lasts much longer than we'd think.

As I maintain a good martial arts program and I am friendly with many of the local MA schools across styles, we've managed to form various symbiotic partnerships, where we refer prospects with different needs than we can provide. I've sent more than a handful of students to my friend's TKD dojang over the years as I believe they would learn useful martial arts there and I've had some referred back in return.

There is value in friendship among different schools, even if they practice different martial arts. The reverse of that is enmity, which is also nothing to scoff at.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

It's my belief that anyone offering a 1 year BB in my area will be at an competitive disadvantage over time as the word gets out about the limited curriculum offered by them. I don't think American studio owners necessarily are only after money by making the rank more difficult to achieve.

Talk about a 180!! Not on your part but in terms of subject: this the first time that I can recall that the notion of a four years to BB equates to being after money.

Usually, it is the two year and under schools that are accused of this, mainly on the basis of the same testing fees in a shorter amount of time, a quicker blackbelt, and thus attracting many more of the 'quit after BB students' than a "real school" would be able to attract.

I think they believe they are genuinely doing the student a service by making the curriculum more comprehensive and that would be my position too in their shoes.

Time in grade doesn't necesarilly equate to making the rank more difficult to achieve. It simply takes longer. Requiring that students perform at an A+ level or retest would make it more difficult.

The time in grade is, as I have said before, unimportant to me. If you train for 30 years, the extra three years you spent in colored belts over the Korean guy is insignificant.

Regarding those one year BB students quitting after they get their belt, they'll quit anyway. Even in they're stellar when they quit after four years, after a year or two of not practicing they will be no better than the one year guy who just quit, but will probably still be proud to tell you that they have a black belt.

Daniel

 

[puunui]

I think it matters from a commercial studio perspective. Negative word-of-mouth 'advertising' gets around quickly and it lasts much longer than we'd think.

I don't think so. There is a school here, and it was known as black belt mill. None of the other Karate schools or instructors respected this particular school for the poor quality of its students, or the speed in which they promoted students to 1st Dan. I believe they were also the first to have contracts. I had classmates from elementary school who were part of that dojo because the headquarters at one time was down the road from where we lived. I remember thinking that their style was weak and the practitioners were not that good.
But the school has been around for almost 50 years, graduating thousands of students to 1st Dan and I would see the head instructor with his "Shihan" license plate around town, always in a brand new Cadillac. No one cares, except maybe other martial art practitioners.

 

[puunui]

Talk about a 180!! Not on your part but in terms of subject: this the first time that I can recall that the notion of a four years to BB equates to being after money.

Of course there is an aspect of stretching out the guep curriculum for financial reasons. A friend of mine had 14 or 15 guep levels, back when it wasn't common to have that, and when I asked him why, he said it was to stretch out the color belt curriculum, with the understanding that most people quit after reaching 1st Dan. Longer time to 1st Dan means more money in terms of tuition payments.

 

[dancingalone]

I don't think so. There is a school here...

<shrugs> There was a local Jhoon Rhee school here (luckily not in my immediate lineage) that was notorious for being over commercial with fees for everything. The school master even had his students do their calisthenics in their sparring gear, so they would wear them out faster, and you had to buy gear through him. Eventually people got wise to him and the sign-ups and continuing tuition dried up. He's been gone from the area for over a decade now, but you still hear various negative remarks about him from MA people in town whenever the word McDojo comes up.

Also as I mentioned before on the board, I've had students specifically come to my school and ask if I would teach them 'good' martial arts as opposed to the commercialized stuff they've trained in before.

In short, I believe one's reputation is a factor in the financial success of one's school, even if we discount every thing else about it.

 

[andyjeffries]

For example, a TKD school who's owner is also an advanced hapkidoist decides to work in his full HKD hoshinsul and bo staff curriculum (meaning actually learning the weapon, not just a few forms) as a requirement for first dan students in addition to learning Koryo. In that scenario, two years to second dan instead of one would be perfectly acceptable in my opinion.

I would argue though that the instructor should be grading students in both arts... Rather than trying to blend Hapkido in to Taekwondo and just consider it an enhancement, why not actually learn both arts.

I know that's common Korea and I know at least one member of this board that holds high ranks in both, so why use it as justification to pad the Taekwondo curriculum - why not just do both arts and grade separately?

 

[dancingalone]

I would argue though that the instructor should be grading students in both arts... Rather than trying to blend Hapkido in to Taekwondo and just consider it an enhancement, why not actually learn both arts.

I know that's common Korea and I know at least one member of this board that holds high ranks in both, so why use it as justification to pad the Taekwondo curriculum - why not just do both arts and grade separately?

Like everything, it depends. The two have a long history of being blended together. Depending on the person you ask, it might actually be a recent development to try to separate the two into different offerings.

The Hwarang-do people actually do something similar. They have a stripped down taekwondo-like version of martial arts called 'tae soo do'. Tae soo do is supposed to be a gateway to the full blown Hwarang-do eventually for serious students.

My thought is that if you are lucky enough to come from one of those TKD lineages with a strong background as well in what is now called hapkido, by all means continue with the winning formula. Don't dilute your offering by separating them.

 

[Balrog]

Ata is one of the reasons tkd has such a bad rep in my area. I have had a few exp with bb from ata, none good.

Sorry, I had to laugh at that. I'm an ATA instructor and I recently had a student claiming to hold Black Belt rank come in. He said he was Shotokan plus an "independant" style of TKD. I ran him through a review of basics.

I normally will honor a Black Belt from another style, but I had to have a sit-down session with the guy afterward and tell him honestly that I couldn't. I've got Green Belts with better technique than he had. I offered to train him starting over as a White Belt.

Needless to say, he didn't accept.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I would argue though that the instructor should be grading students in both arts... Rather than trying to blend Hapkido in to Taekwondo and just consider it an enhancement, why not actually learn both arts.

I know that's common Korea and I know at least one member of this board that holds high ranks in both, so why use it as justification to pad the Taekwondo curriculum - why not just do both arts and grade separately?

Having seen the school where I train shift from a hybrid TKD/HKD program to offering two straight TKD and HKD classes, I can find arguments for both methods.

The hybrid class only ranked in TKD, which was fine. Nobody complained and everyone enjoyed the change of pace on 'Self defense nights.' It also made scheduling easier.

With two seprate classes, most students will try both briefly and end up gravitating to one or the other. I learned the hybrid class and tested for my ildan shortly before he split the programs off. What I observed is that pretty much all of the adults gravitated to HKD and very few of the kids, while a few adult stayed in TKD, but the vast majority were kids. The adult TKD class pretty much vanished entirely.

Another factor is that movement in hapkido is different than that of taekwondo. Not better or worse, but different. While the hoshinsul can be adapted to taekwondo, learning hapkido as a martial art as opposed to taekwondo with hoshinsul culled from hapkido were very different. Again, not a better/worse type of different; just different.

Teaching the two as separate arts has the benefit of people being able to experience something very different from taekwondo and enables the school to reach a wider number of people.

Teaching them together, however, makes one art more appealing to a broader group and enables you to maintain a more streamlined schedule.

Lastly, there are a good number of TKD instructors who have picked up some hoshinsul culled from HKD but who are not really qualified to teach hapkido as a separate course of study. They have worked these techniques into their TKD curriculum nicely and they need not bother with ranking in two separate arts.

Daniel

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

My thought is that if you are lucky enough to come from one of those TKD lineages with a strong background as well in what is now called hapkido, by all means continue with the winning formula. Don't dilute your offering by separating them.

Not sure what you mean by this. Hapkido and Taekwondo are roughly the same age and hapkido has been called hapkido for about as long as taekwondo has been called taekwondo (both began in about 1945 went through numerous name changes).

Daniel

 

[dancingalone]

Not sure what you mean by this. Hapkido and Taekwondo are roughly the same age and hapkido has been called hapkido for about as long as taekwondo has been called taekwondo (both began in about 1945 went through numerous name changes).

Daniel

It's my understanding that there are dinosaurs who learned some grappling technique twined with striking from before and during the kwan period of TKD. These grappling techniques could have come from jujutsu/hapkido and/or judo. Later, these people joined up with the tae kwon do umbrella and ultimately they and their students fell into one of various camps after many TKD splits: tang soo do/Moo Duk Kwan, ITF, KKW, etc. It is not uncommon for various TKD practitioners to still display some close range knowledge descended from that time, even if no one knows exactly where it came from.

For example, a local TSD guy I know has a pretty fair koshi nage done off the double handed entry. This is a common, common training technique in aikido with the double hands taught to help beginners understand the wrapping and coiling to spin uke down and over your hip. I asked both him and his instructor if they had practiced aikido before and both was very emphatic about this being part of their TSD system all along. The instructor's instructor was a student of Hwang Kee...

So I have no real proof that this throw came all the way from Korea, back in the days of Hwang Kee, but I'm inclined to think there might be a link there. It is also always enjoyable to work out with people from other dinosaur lines of Korean karate like Pasa-Ryu or Chayon-ryu for other interesting examples of lineages that forged different parallel paths to ITF and KKW.

 

[puunui]

For example, a local TSD guy I know has a pretty fair koshi nage done off the double handed entry. This is a common, common training technique in aikido with the double hands taught to help beginners understand the wrapping and coiling to spin uke down and over your hip. I asked both him and his instructor if they had practiced aikido before and both was very emphatic about this being part of their TSD system all along. The instructor's instructor was a student of Hwang Kee...

It might be in his lineage, depending on what his Moo Duk Kwan lineage is. I know that GM KIM Ki Whang was an Aikido practitioner and used to wear hakama. Or he might just be mistaken about where that particular technique came from.

 

[Twin Fist]

you might be the one in a million, but in my experience, the ata is nothing but a belt factory putting out crappy BB's that cant fight to save thier lives.

Sorry, I had to laugh at that. I'm an ATA instructor and I recently had a student claiming to hold Black Belt rank come in. He said he was Shotokan plus an "independant" style of TKD. I ran him through a review of basics.

I normally will honor a Black Belt from another style, but I had to have a sit-down session with the guy afterward and tell him honestly that I couldn't. I've got Green Belts with better technique than he had. I offered to train him starting over as a White Belt.

Needless to say, he didn't accept.

 

[puunui]

you might be the one in a million, but in my experience, the ata is nothing but a belt factory putting out crappy BB's that cant fight to save thier lives.

Might depend on your location. I know in the Sacramento area, GM Clint Robinson put out a lot of great practitioners. He did leave the ATA a while back and fully converted to Kukki Taekwondo (I should really say re-converted, since he was a Kukkiwon 3rd Dan back in 1973). And he probably opened more ATA schools worldwide than any other single practitioner out there.

 

[puunui]

It's my understanding that there are dinosaurs who learned some grappling technique twined with striking from before and during the kwan period of TKD. These grappling techniques could have come from jujutsu/hapkido and/or judo.

Or it might have come from someplace else. Every time I see GM Han Won LEE, we always do this mongolian arm wrestling thing. There is an arm hooking version as well, but we always do the arm wrestling version. His instructor, GM CHONG Hwa, was a Kang Duk Won and apparently it was an exercise GM YOON Byung In brought back with him from Mongolia.

 

[puunui]

Another factor is that movement in hapkido is different than that of taekwondo. Not better or worse, but different. While the hoshinsul can be adapted to taekwondo, learning hapkido as a martial art as opposed to taekwondo with hoshinsul culled from hapkido were very different. Again, not a better/worse type of different; just different.

When people think about Hapkido influencing Taekwondo, they tend to think about self defense techniques, or more specifically, defense against grabs. But the bigger influence is, in my opinion, the Hapkido kicking techniques that has been adopted by Taekwondo. This includes kicks like push kick, spin hook kick, ax kick, and others as well, including the use of body weight and locking the hip/femur joint while kicking for maximum power, and use of steps in kicking. In the 40's and 50's, Taekwondo kicks consisted mainly of knee snap kicks without the use of body weight. You stood there and kicked in place during class, snapping at the knee. The only kick back then that had any weight behind it in those days was the side kick.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

My question is what is an acceptable time to reach BB?

I've found it useful to use logged training hours rather than 'years' to reach any particular level. When I became a PADI certified rescue diver we kept a log book of our diving hours, events, types of dives, depth of dives etc. Pilots have this as well.

In this way an instructor can keep a count of training hours of each student, and the student is encouraged (required) to keep a personal log with additonal information besides just the hours i.e. seminars, special functions, testings etc.

What is an acceptable time to BB? Well, that would differ from student to student per their abilities. But what can be done is a minimum time-in-grade for testing. If a student isn't ready when that minimum time has arrived, they don't test.

If we use the Korean model of 1 year to BB at 5 classes per week for 1 hour each (as an example) that is roughly 250 hours of training. If that particular number of hours is the minimum then it would take someone training only twice per week longer of course.

 

[Twin Fist]

Might depend on your location. I know in the Sacramento area, GM Clint Robinson put out a lot of great practitioners. He did leave the ATA a while back and fully converted to Kukki Taekwondo (I should really say re-converted, since he was a Kukkiwon 3rd Dan back in 1973). And he probably opened more ATA schools worldwide than any other single practitioner out there.

that is awesome, i hope the entire org goes that way.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

<shrugs> There was a local Jhoon Rhee school here (luckily not in my immediate lineage) that was notorious for being over commercial with fees for everything. The school master even had his students do their calisthenics in their sparring gear, so they would wear them out faster, and you had to buy gear through him. Eventually people got wise to him and the sign-ups and continuing tuition dried up. He's been gone from the area for over a decade now, but you still hear various negative remarks about him from MA people in town whenever the word McDojo comes up.

Also as I mentioned before on the board, I've had students specifically come to my school and ask if I would teach them 'good' martial arts as opposed to the commercialized stuff they've trained in before.

In short, I believe one's reputation is a factor in the financial success of one's school, even if we discount every thing else about it.

I couldnt agree more with this. In general, the public have started to wake up to 'belt factories'. Whereas once upon a time people saw a quick path to black belt as a good thing, opinions on this are now changing. I know of people now whose first question when inquiring about schools to train at is "how long to bb?", and if the answer is less than 3.5-4 years then they wont train there. Schools that have a reputation for giving out black belts in quick time pretty quickly lose credibility and if there is one thing a business needs its credibility. For me, I cant even take a club seriously that will give you a black belt in under 3 years. We have had a korean "1 year bb" come and train at our club and they could not hold their own with what I consider to be 'real' black belts.

 

[TKD Scotland]

It's not a time period in terms of years, but in terms of hours of actual work put in.

It took me over seven years training once a week for one hour, but for two a week students 4 years is realistic.

The fastest you could possibly get is three years though as Geup gradings are only held ever every three months.

For under 16's it takes minimum 6 years, regardless of training hours, because we have a half Geup system.

350 hours is a good benchmark.