Dominus Posted February 20, 2006 Posted February 20, 2006 I find it absurd that some schools actually give kids blackbelts at such young ages, like 6 or 7. I mean really, do they REALLY think a 3 foor tall kid can defeat a big thug that jumps you on the street? These little kids will then end up going to school and challenging some much bigger guy to a fight and end up breaking every bone in their body. Sure they may have done the forms right and everything, but are they REALLY qualified? Schools need to be more strict when giving out belts, and their should be an age limit of at least 10 before you can get a black belt. Who agrees?
Roxor Posted February 20, 2006 Posted February 20, 2006 you bring up a goo point, i cant stand it to see someone who doesnt really qualify for thier blackbelt, or are shoboating it, if they brag about it they dont diserve it! I dont think the kids would be dumb enough to challenge someone like 2x thier hieght tho, i mean how dumb can you be??? well...there was that one kid in my class who stapled his arm, chugged glue, and accidentaly stabbed himself in the hand when playing around in Tech Ed class...i guess pretty dumb but he doesnt count Technique is all that matters! NOT YOUR BELT!!
Jiffy Posted February 21, 2006 Posted February 21, 2006 This issue has been discussed on here before, but i have to say that i agree fully.In Shotokan, this is addressed by the grade of "Shodan-Ho" (junior black). Only someone 16 or older can get "Shodan" (1st Dan) or higher.Having said that, we have never had to award one because we haven't had a junior stick it long enough to reach that level (fastest we have graded someone to black is about 5.5 years) The mind is like a parachute, it only works when it's open.
b3n Posted February 21, 2006 Posted February 21, 2006 I find it absurd that some schools actually give kids blackbelts at such young ages, like 6 or 7. I mean really, do they REALLY think a 3 foor tall kid can defeat a big thug that jumps you on the street? So getting a black belt automatically means you should be able to defeat anyone regardless of their age/size?? My Nidan Grading! Check it Out: http://www.karateforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=27140OSU!"Behind each triumph are new peaks to be conquered." - Mas OyamaDojo Kun:http://www.diegobeltran.com/htms/dojo/dojokun.htmhttps://www.kyokushinkarate.cjb.net
SubGrappler Posted February 21, 2006 Posted February 21, 2006 I find it absurd that some schools actually give kids blackbelts at such young ages, like 6 or 7. I mean really, do they REALLY think a 3 foor tall kid can defeat a big thug that jumps you on the street? These little kids will then end up going to school and challenging some much bigger guy to a fight and end up breaking every bone in their body. Sure they may have done the forms right and everything, but are they REALLY qualified? Schools need to be more strict when giving out belts You started off great here.and their should be an age limit of at least 10 before you can get a black belt. Who agrees? But how do you start there and end up here? A 10 year old isnt going to do much better than a 6 or 7 year old. If you dont want to be a laughing stock, it should be at least 18 years old for a black belt- and none of that junior black belt stuff either- thats just as bad.Even an 18 year old is going to have a difficult time defeating a full grown adult, even though he would by definition also be an adult- theres a difference between a "man" and a "kid" - an 18 year old is still a kid and has a lot to overcome to beat a man in a fight.So getting a black belt automatically means you should be able to defeat anyone regardless of their age/size??Of course thats not true, but your rank should be represenative of your fighting ability. You're practicing fighting moves- I should hope that if a black belt is signifying your extended knowledge of it he should be able to be a competent fighter.
Dominus Posted February 21, 2006 Author Posted February 21, 2006 Yeah 10 isnt a good age, but 18 is stilla bit too high. A good age for blackbelt would be 14 or 15.
karatekid1975 Posted February 21, 2006 Posted February 21, 2006 Ya know, I thought about this when I saw this before (in another thread, and I didn't respond). I was attacked at 9 years old. I was attacked by a guy roughly 190 pounds, maybe slightly more, in his mid to late 30's. I was a small girl for my age. I do not think I could have fought this guy off, even if I had training at the time. I did put up a good fight (my dad taught me how to fight some), but I lost.I don't see how a BB at 9 years old can fight off a guy that is 3 times her age, mostly muscle, but she wears a BB.Just think about it .... I've been there (except the BB part, but I did try to fight back). It's very emotional for me. I wouldn't award no one that young with a BB. BUT I would teach them good self defense skills to get away, if possible.BUT after my training, I was attacked again, and won (I was an adult by then, but a beginner in MA ... go figure). Laurie F
MartialArthur Posted February 21, 2006 Posted February 21, 2006 I am a black belt, I like to think that I deserve it, but I don't think I could necessarily defeat someone twice my height and double my weight...Just like a 9 year old would not be able to defeat an adult. That does not make me (or the 9 year old) less deserving of our ranks.Children should be compared to other children, not adults. Being invincible should not be required to be worthy of a black belt. If a child works as hard for as long as an adult, and has the same skill level, why deny him a black belt? So that we can feel better about our own black belt?My 11 year old son earned his black belt at 10 - after 4 years of training and passing the exact same test our teens and adults must pass. He is every bit a black belt, and can handle himself with anyone even close to his size. I can think of no reason to deny him the rank he earned.
Meguro Posted February 21, 2006 Posted February 21, 2006 It's all relative. The minimum requirement for a blackbelt is the knowledge of some basics and whatever other skills your style requires. That's it. Havng a black belt doesn't automatically make you king of the concrete jungle, no matter how old or how good you are. Its only significance is within the dojo or organization.If I ran my own dojo, I'd be tempted to make it next to impossible to obtain a black belt, but common sense would prevail, especially if you have bills to pay. Most dojo operate this way.On the other hand, say you practiced Muay Thai. They don't even bother with the superficiality of belts and rank. What matters is who's still standing after the final bell. It's pretty easy to figure out the pecking order under these conditions, not that these guys care about such things.
SigungWhite Posted February 21, 2006 Posted February 21, 2006 I would like to take a different angle on the today's Black Belt. 1. I look at the promotion like the a combination of military and educatonal traits. I want Black Belts who are willing to pass on what they know. I want my Black Belts to be responsible for their lives in the General Sence. 2. Todays BB are independent minded and creative. So, to maintain this I let them be that way and give them ownership in their lives. 3. I don't use a Jr. Black Belt System because I choose not too.....Sigung White 34 years in the Martial Arts, Certified Police Trainer. Member of the Professional Karate Commission, IAOMAS, Fist Law Society, Director of the Molum Combat Arts Association and the MLCAA Honor Society
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now