Belt Testing in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu

[ps1]

This post was originally published as an article in a dedicated KarateForums.com Articles section, which is no longer online. After the section was closed, this article was most to the most appropriate forum in our community.

The other day I was having a jiu-jitsu discussion with a good friend. I got him into Brazilian jiu-jitsu about 6 years ago and he has since earned his purple belt. He brought up the point that he feels testing is a bit silly in Brazilian jiu-jitsu. Rather, he felt that Professor Pedro Sauer should just watch us roll and decide from there. Further, he wasn't sure why Professor Sauer wants to see some moves and not others. I thought it was an interesting topic and thought I'd share my views both on why to test a person and why certain moves are selected.

To many who came up in the traditional martial arts, such as me, this may be a silly question. I advanced through the ranks in Chuan Fa, Shotokan, and Aiki jujitsu. I tested for all my ranks. So when I had to test in BJJ, it did not seem weird to me. However, as time passed and my BJJ knowledge grew, I learned that not all instructors have testing. In fact, it's quite common for an instructor to simply stop class, promote the student, and then get back to work. This is due to the "aliveness" of the art. Day after day you share blood, sweat and tears with your teammates in an effort to make your techniques work against a resisting partner. Some believe the ability to defeat others at or above your rank should be the only mark necessary for promotion. Others believe that competition performance should be the indicator for promotion.

This article will present the purpose behind both testing and why certain techniques are selected over others. I will point out the importance of understanding the fundamentals behind the techniques you use, as well as reasons to test and not to test a student in Brazilian jiu-jitsu.

Why to Test

I propose four purposes behind testing a student in Brazilian jiu-jitsu.

The first is when you are the promoting instructor, but not the regular instructor of a student. Professor Sauer is an excellent example of this. I've trained with him a lot, but not regularly. Tony Rinaldi is my regular instructor. Before Tony earned black belt, all promotions had to go through Professor. Since he didn't see me (or the others testing) on a regular basis, it only makes sense for him to take a look at my knowledge base and skill compared to his expectations. Therefore it only makes sense to test the student.

The second situation is similar to the first reason. The main exception here is that in watching the skill sets of the students, Professor Sauer is able to get a handle on what Tony is teaching and how he approaches his teaching. So, in this instance, it's really the instructor being tested through the students. Professor Sauer is the head of a gigantic association with over 100 schools from China to Iceland. It's easy for standards to slip in such a large organization. A great way to wrangle in the standards is to require testing with techniques that demonstrate your standards. When the students are not up to par, the instructor is not up to par.

The third example is a confidence booster. Sometimes a student doesn't feel comfortable moving on to the next rank. I've personally seen students purposely no show for a test just to avoid earning a new rank. Completing the test successfully is a great way for a student to realize they actually are ready and gain some confidence in the process.

The final reason is similar to the second; consistency and fairness. One of the fastest ways to lose your student base is to appear as though you're playing favorites. By testing every student you are able to maintain consistency and fairness for every student.

When Not to Test

When the promoting instructor is also the regular instructor for the student, it doesn't always make sense to test. The instructor trains with and observes the student on a daily basis. He knows what the student's skill set is and where he needs to improve. Unless, as previously mentioned, the student has a confidence problem there is no reason to make him test. I can think of a student of mine who will have a blue belt thrown at his head once I earn my black belt.

What to Put into the Test

For Professor Sauer, he and Rickson Gracie sat down and decided what would go into the test. The moves they selected and the way they are done were chosen very specifically. This is not because the way we do them is the highest percentage or the "best" way to do them. It's because they wanted as many "fundamental" concepts and "basic" moves as possible.

You can see Professor Sauer demonstrate his requirements here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66u3YSxf8Zg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_ZdoqU3JAk

What Does "Fundamental" Mean in This Context?

The shrimp would be a fundamental movement. That is, it's a movement that, while it has a specific technique attached to it, is also used and required in many other moves.

If you watch the way Professor Sauer performs the beginner's armbar from the guard, you'll see he puts the foot on the hip, raises his hips, pivots about 90 degrees, pushes the face, and then brings the leg across to lock in the armbar. This is not because it's the "best" armbar. It's because it gives him the opportunity to see both the armbar and the fundamental movement of placing the foot on the hip of an opponent to lock him in place as well as the ability to pivot with the hips off the ground. The foot placement and pivot with hips lifted are fundamental movements. He now sees two things: you have good fundamental mechanics and you know how to get to the armbar.

At the beginning of the second video, Professor Sauer talks about passing the guard. Notice that he puts as much emphasis on the fundamental concepts of posture, and not letting the opponent get the legs into the game, as he does the pass itself. The examples of fundamentals are throughout the whole test.

Rather than just looking at any armbar or any guard pass, the two masters built in the fundamental mechanics of Brazilian jiu-jitsu as well.

What is a "Basic" Technique?

The basic technique is the most stripped down version of the technique. In addition, they are the more high percentage techniques that you would hit on someone with little or no training. That's an important point as jiu-jitsu's primary design was originally a fighting system to cope with various situations and styles of fighters, most of whom had little to no knowledge of grappling. Therefore, you won't see much in the way of open guard/half guard/twister side control and so on. Not because they aren't good or effective, rather because they are mostly the way one skilled grappler tries to defeat another skilled grappler. A competition oriented association may disagree on this point, but Professor Sauer is not competition oriented and doesn't put as much emphasis on one student being able to defeat another student. He was more concerned with the ability to perform techniques for self defense.

While the moves themselves are very basic, I would think most people would have to admit that these are the moves you hit the most. You may set them up differently, but they usually end with these moves somewhere. If you haven't watched the video, you'll see things like armbar from the guard and mount, cross choke, scissor sweep, sit up/hip bump sweep, kimura, Americana, stack pass, how to mount and how to maintain side control among other moves.

He selects the sweeps he does because they are easy to do slowly and still demonstrate the understanding of how a sweep works. That is, move the opponent past his base, or move the base from under the opponent. No matter how much spinning, inverting, gripping, pushing or pulling you do, it really is just about base in relation to center of gravity.

Lastly, the techniques must be demonstrated slowly. The reason for this is simple. If you can't do it slow, it's really going to suck when you try to go fast. Moreover, it gives him a chance to correct small details that might get missed with speed.

The final component of the test is to watch the students spar a little. But it's usually only a few minutes and he really doesn't care who wins or loses. He's more concerned with seeing that they are attempting to use technique, rather than just muscling through the opponent.

In summation, while testing in Brazilian jiu-jitsu is not always a necessity, it ensures consistency, fairness, proper mechanics and understanding of how moves work. Testing allows both the instructor and the student to see where they stand and where to improve while also giving the student a bit of self confidence.

[Patrick]

Thank you for the submission, Bill.

Patrick

[ninjanurse]

Good info! I agree that testing, of some kind, is necessary for both student and instructor to evaluate where they are and where to improve.

[tallgeese]

I agree with you wholeheartedly on the concept of testing in the case of a visiting professor who might not see you work every day. I also agree that your regular instructor, if he's the one doing the promotion, should be more than capable of telling when you're ready for promotion.

One of the cool things I liked about BJJ almost immediate was the fact that the belt testing thing was pretty rare. I've always thought it was really unnecessary in most cases due to the constant pressure testing a student goes thru.

I have noticed that it's becoming more popular. I'll guess we'll just have to see how this trend goes.

[sensei8]

While I'm not a BJJ practitioner through the formal training, I found your article spot on solid across the board. Covered quite a lot of information that sends a written video of what one might be wondering when and before they step onto the mat...EXCELLENT ARTICLE!! I thank you for it!!

[ps1]

Thanks for the comments! Much appreciated.

[bushido_man96]

Great article, ps1. Very nicely laid out, explained, and I like the video demonstrations, too.