How many years to black?

[Archimoto]

How long is take for a tree to grow?

[sensei8]

How long is take for a tree to grow?

Solid post!!

[CredoTe]

How long is take for a tree to grow?

Solid post!!

Absolutely!

[Archimoto]

Thanks!

[Doctrine612]

I believe 3 years is a good number a little less or a little more.

Two days a week plus a few hours between.

Also I teach isshinryu, when I taught one on one I would say two years but in a class setting three years. But then you have a life time to train in black belt.

[Nidan Melbourne]

Do-gi-

I had some reservations about testing for black at the time I did because I thought about the time of training. However, since then, I've trained with a lot of black belts from other clubs (some Nidan ranks and above), and I can tell you that I now have no reservations!

I've also watched hours upon hours of footage of other Shodan level practitioners and above, and I can say with full confidence that my skill/knowledge does back up my rank (compared to others with similar rank).

I believe that there should be no set time constraints on testing requirements. That's essentially pigeonholing students. I've seen a lot of people that pick up very very quickly, and I've seen people that take 6 months to learn how to do a block correctly. If I set a time requirement of 6 months to test, why should the student that picks up a tecnhique in 2 weeks be judged the same as the one that took 6 months? I believe a student should be tested when the sensei feels he/she is ready to test. The quality of the student compared to their rank is a function of the sensei's experience and knowledge at that point. If the sensei is a bad judge, then the rank probably will be unjustified. However, if the sensei knows what he's doing, then the skill level of his students should coincide with the ranks of those students.

I get you get that there should be no set time contraints. But in the end the student dictates how often they train and how hard they train (and how much effort).

Students who pick things up quickly doesn't mean what they can do is quality. Because the student who takes 6 months to learn it will have practiced it more than the one who picked it up in 2 weeks.

Even if the sensei is amazing in terms of knowledge and experience, in the end it boils down to the student to learn the technique. The sensei will teach the student and give him advice on how to improve and what he/she is doing wrong. BUT the student has to take it on board to improve.

At my school for each rank (with the exception of Black Belts); you get tested every 6 lessons for a different test (and have to pass). To be eligible to grade you have to have 5 'tags' (which means you have to have passed all 5 tests). Basics, Combinations, Kata, Pre-Arranged Sparring & Sparring are the tests. The 1st Kyu (1st Brown) you will be able to grade with 4 tags (and not have the 'Tag' for kumite). For Blue Belts (sankyu) and above you will spend more time on those belts over the other ranks. Every rank (obviously not black belts) have to spend a MINIMUM of 30 lessons on each rank. So Blue Belts & above will usually spend about 50 lessons prior to grading, and 1st kyu's spending on average 70 lessons.

[jaypo]

Nidan Melbourne- I like that system a lot. I think that philosophy would have been beneficial considering the ongoing problem I posted about in the "Politics" forum.

I agree with you about the quality. That's when it becomes a function of how well the instructor judges the skill level. If he is a poor judge, then his promotion will not be as meaningful. However, if he is good at judging the skill level of individuals, then the rank will hold merit.

I am not experienced enough to call myself an expert, but I do participate in the gradings. I'm very strict on basics, so I tend to be a little more critical than some of the others. But my M.I. was trained in Okinawa and in the states by Master Okazaki (a direct student of Master Funakoshi), and he's been instructing for over 40 years, so I trust his judgment.

But overall, I think that how the student retains and applies what he learns is more important than how many months he trains. If he's able to show the same skill level as someone that has trained twice as long, he should be on the same level as that person.

Heck, Joe Lewis went to Okinawa and received his black belt in 7 months. I'd bet that some of the students that had been there for 3 years weren't happy. But he wound up being one of the best karatekas in the world.

[vantheman]

While I could give you an average value for the period of time needed to attain a black belt (5 years, for the heck of it), to try and say this represents a "typical" practitioner over simplifies the whole picture. The period of time required varies based on training frequency, training duration, the style in which you train in, the testing cycle, the instructor's expectations, the intensity and effort of training, technique retention, any tenure that might be required, ect. Granted, there are some trends within styles, schools, instructors, ect. as to how relatively long it takes to attain the rank, but it's really an aggregate of characteristics of the individual and the circumstances of his/her training.

[Spartacus Maximus]

Every student learns at their own individual space. That is why the number of years it takes to reach any level is not the same everywhere. There can only be given as a very rough guideline for teaching purposes. The most important factors are how someone practises as much as how often.

For example 2 students are taught one kata. Student A is at the dojo 3 times a week for 2 hours. However he never practises outside the dojo. Student B comes to the dojo only once a week, twice every other week and has the same two hour sessions. Unlike A, B practises and reviews everything everyday for one hour or more.

In this example, B's skills would improve much faster than A. Even if both keep the same pace for a year because A trains 6 hours in a week and B does at least double that time. One year is not the same for A and B.

When I consider how long someone took to reach a skill level, the first thing I ask is how much does this person train and practise in a single day and how many days each week. Obviously someone who trains an hour or more every single day for years should be very skilled at whatever they train.

[Nidan Melbourne]

Nidan Melbourne- I like that system a lot. I think that philosophy would have been beneficial considering the ongoing problem I posted about in the "Politics" forum.

I agree with you about the quality. That's when it becomes a function of how well the instructor judges the skill level. If he is a poor judge, then his promotion will not be as meaningful. However, if he is good at judging the skill level of individuals, then the rank will hold merit.

I am not experienced enough to call myself an expert, but I do participate in the gradings. I'm very strict on basics, so I tend to be a little more critical than some of the others. But my M.I. was trained in Okinawa and in the states by Master Okazaki (a direct student of Master Funakoshi), and he's been instructing for over 40 years, so I trust his judgment.

But overall, I think that how the student retains and applies what he learns is more important than how many months he trains. If he's able to show the same skill level as someone that has trained twice as long, he should be on the same level as that person.

Heck, Joe Lewis went to Okinawa and received his black belt in 7 months. I'd bet that some of the students that had been there for 3 years weren't happy. But he wound up being one of the best karatekas in the world.

The system that we test people is fair. If they fail they will either get retested the next class or in 6 classes time.

After Gradings if they are weak in something they get a +6 lessons (or at my old dojo a 'G' on their card; which signifies a grading fault/error) so they don't get tested on that part straight away. Say if they got a 'G' on kata; they wouldn't get tested on lesson 18 but would on 24. It is so they get extra practice on that part.

At the end of the day it is down to the student to work had at what they have been taught, especially after the class they just attended.

If they learn it faster than someone else, great but it shouldn't mean that they can slack off on it. I have taught some students at my dojo in the adults class, picked things up extremely quickly and learnt some potential applications for it. But several weeks later (and of training 3 times a week) they couldn't even show someone else it.