KorroddyDude

Interesting video BJJ Gi Collector in Japan with over 300… Does anyone here collect BJJ gis or train with someone who does? While I don't intend to make this a hobby myself, I can see myself having more gis than I actually need by snatching up various limited editions as they become available.

I live in a pretty rough area, only because of a house that my wife inherited from her grandmother. We're getting a lot more than we pay for, so we don't complain at all. That said, my children also train in karate. During my two-month BJJ stint in 2023, I tried to get them to come with me but they were uninterested. When I decided recently that I was getting back into BJJ, my 12 year old daughter came to me and insisted that she train too. When I questioned her sudden interest, she told me of an incident in the neighborhood I didn't know about: when it was time for her to use her karate against another girl who was attacking her, the girl was getting straight pummeled and eventually realized that she wasn't going to outstrike my daughter. So she tackled my daughter to the ground, and that was all she wrote. My daughter decided "never again" when I told her I was getting back into BJJ. I explained to her the children's belt system, how it differs from the adult system, and how she has to be reevaluated upon ageing out of the children's system (i.e., there are no equivalents, and therefore no guarantee that she'll start the adult system at anything higher than a white belt). She shrugged it off, and was unbothered. All she cares about is not letting what happened to her last time happen again.

BJJ - it's been growing in popularity for the past 30 years, and still growing. What is one of its biggest selling points? The time and work that it takes to get a black belt in it. Easily at least three times the length and intensity of traditional Japanese and Korean martial arts. BJJ draws people in, because they feel that the blood, sweat, and tears that it takes to get a black belt in it gives it the most validity. In other words, people want to feel that they've earned something. The thought of a karate white belt saying "I don't know the kata that the green belt over there is doing, but give me a black belt right now anyway" is just unimaginable to me. But I can assure you this: any instructor who gives into such a demand will lose more students than they gain as a result of this.

Right, but the issue here is how students are supposed to know to use these titles if telling them what your titles are is such a big no-no.

The "dojang" and "Japanese" culture thing is throwing me off, but trying to make sense of this is probably besides the point. This story seems a bit odd. If something like this was running rampant at your dojang (or dojo, if it's Japanese? I dunno. I'll say "club" from here on), then it would be happening everywhere. There may be students who ask when the next test is, what they have to do, etc. But I've never seen students who flat out say "Screw the requirements, give me a black belt now." I'm sure they know they can buy one on Amazon for $15.

I'm of the mind that if you present a problem without proposing a solution, then it's nothing but pure Grade A whining. In this thread, it's "don't call yourself sensei." In another thread, I got into an almost week long back and forth with another member about the use of shogo titles. Okay, so many people don't like any of those terms. What's the solution? Do we want karate to be more like BJJ, where the formalities are completely done away with? If we want to keep the formalities, then 1) what titles should instructors have, and 2) how should new students be taught to address the instructors if it's pompous for the instructors to tell them? We've some million dollar questions here that need to be answered.

There are schools in my area that require this. And not just bowing to instructors, whether in the dojo or out in public, but bowing to any black belt of higher rank. No thanks to that. I like having a life outside of martial arts.

I'm not understanding the JKA bunkai demonstrations. Are you talking about the Nakayama videos? The general public wouldn't have seen those videos. They have attracted criticism within the karate community, and even within Shotokan. Kousaku Yokota has addressed this in his books, but the consensus is that what we saw are simply "possible" bunkai, which wasn't meant to exclude others. Based on what I've read (I didn't watch UFC in the 90's), BJJ immediately dominated MMA at the time until Muay Thai fighters were shown to be the only martial artists to able to effectively defend BJJ. They were able to do this so well, that even Royce Gracie decided that adding Muay Thai to BJJ was a must. This resulted in karate (and kung fu, and taekwondo), being displaced. I've heard people say similar things about Karate Combat. However, even if these perceptions are correct, Karate Combat at least shows the general public that karate is not the "lame" martial art that it's been perceived to be for the past 20+ years.

If someone refers to you as a primary care physician, there's no implication that the person using that term is submitting to you. That's the difference. If I say "big yellow square," does that mean that all big squares are yellow? No, I simply mean that the square is big and yellow. But our society is egalitarian, even if it's only true on paper. That's why we freak out when we find out that it's not in practice (such as gunning to take the "grand pubas" down a peg). This isn't the case in many other parts of the world.

In my interactions with those of high dan rank from styles with shogo titles, those titles are only used when referring to such individuals in the third person. But I don't think that matters. Ezomatsu simply called out the (mis)use of those titles, not those who hold those titles requiring their students to address them as such. We don't have shogo titles in Shotokan*, so I don't have a dog in the debate over the use of those titles. But I don't think that the motive for criticizing the use of these titles is nobler than the usage. *Yes, I'm aware of some, such as the late Vincent Cruz. But you'll typically only find these in Shotokan dojos that are either independent or affiliated to smaller organizations founded by a Westerner. I believe that those of us in larger reputable organizations like ISKF, JKA, SKIF, JKS, etc have a legitimate right to play the "no true Scotsman" card on that.

The worst thing you can do in a Western egalitarian society such as ours is to have a title that implies command of respect from other people. That will easily attract a mob that can't wait to take you down a peg.

And I would guess that such instances wouldn't have been the norm until around the late 1960's, when Japan had recovered from WWII and became considered a developed country. I discussed before how some Okinawan masters themselves would be turned away by today's purported standards. Remember, there was no "karate-do" in Okinawa at the time. There was only "karate-jutsu" which had no moral component to it. To put things into perspective, there's a passage in the Bible where Jesus was questioned for associating with sinners, and he responded by comparing himself to a doctor tending the sick. Why are we not looking at karate-do the same way?

OP was originally talking about people using their karate training to commit criminal acts on the streets. The conversation is now about safety in the dojo. In my opinion, you can only - and should only - weed out for the latter. Karate only makes you more dangerous in defensive capacity, not an offensive capacity. As is relevant to the discussion, karate is only a tool - a very expensive one that takes years to develop. But you can buy a brand new Taurus for the price of two months of martial arts training (i.e., still a white belt). The common criminal is going to feel out of place and be unable to integrate into any karate dojo, UNLESS he is there to turn his life around. And if he's not there to turn his life around, he's either going to leave after a week or two OR his life might get turned around even if he didn't intend it.

There is a position that this puts you in. Let's say that this pocketed gi existed, and a few of your students owned one. And for half of them, their gi tops were in notably better condition than their pants. Would you recommend this gi to a new student?

The "cheap" and "lazy" part was not reference to wanting pockets. It's in reference to people potentially using their pocketed gi pants as regular pants to be worn with sneakers and a t-shirt. Maybe when they get home, the only thing they'll change is the gi top for a t-shirt, then go out and hang with friends. And it's also one less pair of pants to buy at Walmart. When I stop and think about it, maybe the very reason why gi pants lack the functionality as regular pants is to discourage people from using them that way.