What it means to be a beginner, etc.

[Aodhan]

As i will mention in other posts - proof by anaology is not really any proof when taken too far.

Didnt mean to put words in your mouth Aodhan!

Heh, no worries.

I spent way too much time on Usenet arguing top vs bottom posting, quoting, etc. in my somewhat misspent youth. (Which begs the question, if you misspend your youth, can you ask for a refund?)

Aodhan

[JaseP]

I believe a Black Belt should take about 5-7 years. I took about 5.5 years to test for mine in Soo Bahk Do (havent' found out the results yet - probably take another month or two maybe). Since the US Soo Bahk Do Federation has a minimum of approximately 4.5 years for Cho Dan, most people on average take about 5-6 years.

I can't speak for the US Soo Bahk Do Moo Duk Kwan, but most federations composed of ex-members have a time requirement more on the order of 3.5 years...

I think time limits ensure a certain threshold of physical proficiency - muscle memory rather than mental memory. We're all intelligent people (from what I can gather ), we could probably memorize a typical Korean form in about 20 minutes. It is the training of the muscle memory that takes a long time - it is said that it takes 30 days to develop a habit or 10,000 repetitions of a technique to get it into muscle memory. Given everything that is necessary for a black belt, to get every little aspect of hyung, kicking, basics, etc at that threshold takes some time.

There is no such thing as "muscle memory" all memory takes place in the brain. "Automatic" technique requires imprinting the technique into the basal ganglia of the brain... like walking, riding a bike or a dozen other activities...

As for time requirements, I seriously doubt that the average black belt, regardless of system (Tang Soo Do, TaeKwonDo, Soo Bahk Do, HwaRangDo, This federation, that federation, whatever) has a truly adequate grasp over their technique... That's despite time limits,... even the 5 year plan Black Belts are the same. I remember as first or second Dan seeing other Black Belts who's technique was so sloppy I couldn't fathom how they were able to be considered a Dan ranking. How do I know this??? Easy, I've trained over 23 years, promoted somewhere around twenty o fmy own students to black belt, sat on somewhere between 40-60 testing boards, and taught so many classes I wouldn't even hazzard to count them. My instructor often takes off to do erunds when I come down to his school and just leaves me to teach... But there are an isolated few,... they can be 11 year old kids, or 50 year old women,... or teenagers,... who just nail their technique and are the exception. Some of them have trained a long time, but others only a short while. I comes down to the individual, their drive, their hard work, and their mental capacity for understanding that determines when they've gotten it.

And his Black Belts, my Black Belts, the numerous Black Belts I've seen in countless tournaments,... most of them I can pick out problems with their technique (independant of style, even basic principle). There are some things that only come with time,... but, as I've said before, the skill level associated with 1st Dan doesn't contain much (or any) of that.

Also, time frame for a Cho Dan Black Belt (in recent times) depends on the requirements of your school, your teachers, your organizations. WTF TKD requirements tend to be less and the threshold of proficiency lower - hence you see 2 year black belts. US Soo Bahk Do has the set time limit as an organization. I've heard of ITF TKD instructors who are like drill sargents and don't let you get your black belt till you have been beaten for a good five years.

There are a lot of TaeKwonDo schools that don't teach forms, or don't really care too much for them,... just slap them in for another thing to learn before Black Belt... Less to learn,... easier to make the progression...

Again, I think the time requirement is a good thing for most, but you can't generalize and say that NOBODY can earn their Black Belt in 2-3 years. There are always exceptions. There is always the person who can be shown something once and be able to do it like the've been shown. It depends on the student. The problem is allowing the person who doesn't learn that fast to make the same progression, because they are ambitious but lack the ability to back that ambition up. The second problem is the bad blood people start feeling when others start to get promoted ahead of them. It makes them feel inadequate and quit. You can't run a strong school that way. The only way you are able to prevent that is to implement a time requirement. "Special" promotion schedules get mixed up too much with marketing schemes like "Black Belt Clubs" (our Black Belt Club is a club made up of people who have MADE their Black Belts).

Most of the people who are arguing that time requirements should be implemented are the ones who took a long time to get their Black Belts. I'm wondering if there isn't a fair amount of egocentrism there,... thinking because that is the way it was for them, that it should be the way for all...

A time limit in the 3-4 year range is a nice compromise to getting the "naturals" and the people who just skate through (but aren't lazy enough to fail) to the level...

[EternalRage]

I'll agree that most only use 20% of what they learn in college, and that they don't remember much of that. However, it's the difference between mental learning and physical learning.

When you learn something mentally, your brain actually wires neurons together in specific patterns to "imprint" the memory. If you use that memory constantly, it stays "wired" in the brain. If you don't use it, it eventually disappears. I scored excellently in math on my SAT and ACT's, but I doubt I could pass college trig if I were to take it now.

Muscle memory is similar in that it is pattern memory, but muscle memory does not really fade like mental memories do. You may lose the fine motor skills, but the gross motor movements will still be there.

The physiology information is true yes. But aren't we talking about the actual process of imprinting the patterns themselves? Despite the fact that its easier to lose the mental memory, isn't the process of forming those patterns take more time (generally) for muscle than for brain?

Anyway, for those of you who are getting lost in all the analogies, I'm just trying to say its harder physically to develop the marital arts training when cramming it into a short time frame. Of course, naturally there will be those who are good at cramming (just like in school). But to set time limits just to be sure - 5 to 7 years is good IMHO. Even if they are fast learners who pick up stuff fast, those extra years are good opportunities to just get more experience training, or conditioning (as Sam pointed out), or tournaments, etc.

And, if you want to continue the college analogy further, how much of your time is actually spent on learning your major? Most schools only require half of your time be spent in major courses, the rest is on general ed and electives. When you train in a martial art, 90% of your time is spent in your "major" (so to speak). This is going to greatly reinforce the training, especially since there is so much repetition even from form to form.

This is a good point. I can see this from your perspective. Of course, it depends from what view you are taking your analogies (like Sam pointed out - analogies really aren't good proof to begin with). I could say that a major is analogous to techniques you are good at, or even a facet of training that you like (sparring, forms, etc). In my perspective, I wouldn't say that anything outside of your major is useless or not relevant to the education as a whole.

And as far as life/death? You can get a paramedic certification in about 6 months, and in an emergency I'd trust a paramedic over any doctor (Other than ER) in a street situation any day. (Can you tell I was an ER medic in the Air Force? )

Life/death I should clarify as "anything of major importance" - if you are training to be a professional in any field, you would be doing much more than just 600 hours - possibly depending on what field you are doing, 5000 hrs doesn't seem so outrageous.

But as an analogy to martial arts training, again it is perspective. Some people would relate professional education to master/instructor level training in martial arts. At least in my opinion, I believe it is not - I think it would be more applicable to pre black belt training (which does sound a little extreme).

Time to Black Belt will always be different when considering the appropriate skill level associated with that rank. It will always be different depending on the person/instructor/school/style. I think it has become an important issue because of the abuse of the commercial aspect of martial arts.

Many schools out there are promoting students to black belt very fast in two to three years because its what people want. Customers want things and they want to have them fast. I'm sure everyone as a white belt used to look at black belts and think "when will I get that" or "I can't wait." Promoting people fast for purely commercial aspects (if they don't have the skills to back it up of course) degrades the style and its future practitioners.

Yet a majority of traditional martial artists who are trying to make a living are doing this, and there are an abundance of martial arts practitioners who have black belts where the quality of their technique is atrocious. We can no longer look at black belts the same way as before - hence we can only ask "how much time till you got your black belt," because we can no longer assume a certain threshold of skills with that ranking.

Then, because of the abuse of the commercialism, it has also gotten to the point that regardless of whether you trained 30 hrs a week for 2 years to get to your black belt, if you say "two years," people will automatically become skeptical.

Sucks for the people that learned it fast and do have the skills to back it up, but hey thats how the world turns nowadays.

[JaseP]

Yet a majority of traditional martial artists who are trying to make a living are doing this, and there are an abundance of martial arts practitioners who have black belts where the quality of their technique is atrocious. We can no longer look at black belts the same way as before - hence we can only ask "how much time till you got your black belt," because we can no longer assume a certain threshold of skills with that ranking.

Can no longer look at Black Belts the way we did before... Hmmm,... I think there are a lot of reasons for that. One of those reasons is that people are more exposed to the martial arts than ever before. You used to be able to ask a 10 year old the difference between karate, kung fu and judo, and they couldn't tell you... Now, a 6 year old can probably tell you.

When I started training, martial arts still had a mystique about them. It was fading, but it was still there. No longer. I would say that by the time they hit their 30s, between 33-45% of people, at the very least, have at least tried one martial art... 20-30 years ago that ratio would have been more like 15-25%, possibly less.

When I got my black belt, there were probably 12-15 people in my division in a tournament. Now, there are probably 35 people in that division. There are simply more people training nowdays.

Back in those days a 2nd degree Black Belt was a big deal. Nowdays, they are a dime a dozen. Half my adult class are Black Belts. I like it because I can teach higher end stuff,... but 24 years ago, that would be unheard of in a YMCA (especially the small one where I teach)... At my instructor's school, there have actually been parents who have become miffed if there wasn't a Master present to teach their 6 year old white belt kid (when he or his higher ranked students weren't in, for example),... Back when I started, the Master was the guy you only got to see once every 6 mos. or so.

So does Black Belt mean the same thing??? No. It used to mean rare as well as knowledgeable and skilled. Now, it may only mean knowledgeable and skilled. That alone will diminish it in people's eyes.

Another thing that diminises it is that after BEING a Black Belt for 20+ years, you don't hold the rank in as high of esteem as you did. Your knowledge is an exponential function higher. You still see it as a milestone,... but its one you already passed over.

I also see it when Black Belts get their nose out of joint when they make the rank... expecting a copious amount of butt kissing directed their way and don't get it. I think people have puffed the rank up to be much more than it is. I think a serious amount of that is because they expect Black Belts to be as rare as they once were.

I really don't think the skill level has changed much. What HAS changed is the commitment level, and perhaps the discipline level. But the skill level,... the knowledge level,... no. Doubt this?!?!? Go watch an old Chuck Norris movie (he got his 1st Dan in Tang Soo Do in the early 60s)... See what it is he is doing in the movie that we considered to be so special way back then. I think you'll be surprised at how "un-special" it seems now...

[EternalRage]

I really don't think the skill level has changed much. What HAS changed is the commitment level, and perhaps the discipline level. But the skill level,... the knowledge level,... no. Doubt this?!?!? Go watch an old Chuck Norris movie (he got his 1st Dan in Tang Soo Do in the early 60s)... See what it is he is doing in the movie that we considered to be so special way back then. I think you'll be surprised at how "un-special" it seems now...

Movies back then were different though. No CGI, no acrobatic movements, no speeding up of fight scenes (or slow mo or different frame speeds), no Yuen Woo Ping or other martial arts directors. Part of the reason it doesn't look good (at least to the laymen, and also somewhat to us practitioners - even if its not real it still looks cool) is because movies are different.

I wholeheartedly agree about the commitment and discipline levels changing. As for the knowledge and skill level, I see many schools these days cutting their curriculums shorter and shorter. Some are just doing it to pump out black belts. Others do it because the art itself is changing. Take WTF Taekwondo - decades ago TKDists would have to learn one steps, self defenses, and other things that they do not have in WTF now because of the changes in training. There are other arts that definitely do still keep to their traditions and are still doing things the way they did them 50-100 yrs ago, but those are becoming fewer : (

[Aodhan]

I wholeheartedly agree about the commitment and discipline levels changing. As for the knowledge and skill level, I see many schools these days cutting their curriculums shorter and shorter. Some are just doing it to pump out black belts. Others do it because the art itself is changing. Take WTF Taekwondo - decades ago TKDists would have to learn one steps, self defenses, and other things that they do not have in WTF now because of the changes in training. There are other arts that definitely do still keep to their traditions and are still doing things the way they did them 50-100 yrs ago, but those are becoming fewer : (

And that all depends on the system. There are a few WTF schools around me that still teach the one steps, etc. We have one steps through camo belt (When they start free sparring), all belts have sparring segments (4-9 moves designed to teach flow in sparring), self defense (Joint locks, hold releases, etc.), and board breaks (Required for testing at later belts).

Aodhan

[Patrick]

Continued from http://www.karateforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=13870&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 - we are going to give this it's own thread so that the other one can stay on topic.

Thanks.

[Patrick]

I will go ahead and redirect this discussion this the thread below.

http://www.karateforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=19948&highlight=

Thanks.