What do you think of the obi (belt) grading system?

[Sasori_Te]

I've been reading all of these posts lately that have inspired this post. What do you think of what has become of the belt rank system? Do you think it is a good way to perpetuate the martial arts in a society where status is so important? I personally think it is a hinderance since the belt so often becomes the focus of training and not the knowledge or ideals behind the art. This forum has inspired me to not wear a belt again unless I'm required to do so by my instructors for formal occassions. I'm interested to hear what everyone else thinks.

[Scorcho]

I think that belts often become the goal of training, especially considering the instant satisfaction thinking of many westerners. Originally, in Okinawa, there were only 2 belts, white and black. The reason brown is the color of the belt before black today, is that by the time a student was prepared to test for his shodan, his white belt would be so old and so overused, that it would look brown. In Uechi, this is still the way you can tell how long a person has had a black belt, by how used it looks. At my dojo, we had only 4 belts (white, green, brown, black). At my Aikido dojo, we have 3 (no Green). I think this alone, tells much about these two dojos.

 

Belts are not always bad. They can be a mark of honor, a sign of patience and devotion to the art. However, they can also be a distraction, especially at McDojos. Overall, I would stay away from dojos with many belts, because I believe that belts can become a distraction far too quickly. Besides, the fewer belts there are, the more it means when you advance.

[CheekyMusician]

When I first got involved in martial arts, I thought the belt system should be done away with and that it should just be white and black, and nothing in between, but my opinion has changed over time.

 

I went to an Aikido dojo for a short time where the belt system was just white and black, and although this meant that people in the class tended to be people actually interested in learning martial arts, and not just being able to adorn themselves with some pretty coloured strips of material, it actually caused me quite a few problems. Often I'd get shown how to perform a move by one person, then another person would show me it in a slightly different way. Since everyone was wearing a white belt I'd no way of even attempting to guess who had shown me it the right way. At my karate club I never had that problem when I was a beginner as I could look at their belt for a rough indication of who would be correct. Of course, rank isn't always an indication of skill, but if, for example, a 9th Kyu had shown me to perform a technique one way, then a 1st Kyu had shown me it a different way, I'd know that the 1st Kyu was likely to be a more reliable teacher.

 

I'm not too fussy on belts myself, but they do roughly indicate skill level, which makes things easier for the teacher of the class and for other pupils eg. if you need kata help for say, Heian Yondan, you would know that 5th Kyus and above would have actually passed a belt test with this kata, so they would be able to give you more guidance than a lower Kyu. Coloured belts just make it easier to realise what student is at what stage.

 

Plus, they do give the feeling of achievement.

 

I think belts become a problem when they're handed out like candy. I hate it when you hear about clubs that have about 20 different belt colours, and all sorts of different tabs for the belts. Its as though their club members need constant reassurance and physical proof that they've done well to continue training. Same when belt tests are frequent.

 

I think as long as belt tests are held at least 6 months apart, then you'll be able to weed out the people who are looking for rank, as they might have the patience to wait 6 months for their first belt test, might even stick it out another 6 months for their second, but unlikely that they'll hang around another 6 months for their third unless they're actually more interested in learning than their rank.

[Jussi Häkkinen]

Jigoro Kano incorporated the black belt to martial arts (he was a founder of Judo). In Okinawa, belt system wasn't adopted right away. Funakoshi (then in Japan) took that system from Kano. System wasn't adopted to Okinawa quickly - and when it did, it may already have consisted more than white and black belt.

 

Belts are rather useful if the person goes to seminars around the country. Belt is more important to instructor (of same style and same federation) than it is to practicioner itself. Belt colour is a good guideline about what you can demand from a student and what not.

 

And well, belts can actually make people to use them as mid-goals and encourage them to train. I don't see that as a bad thing.

 

Luckily, there's practically no McDojoism in Finland, so I haven't really seen the effects of it (except in 'net and in BB-magazine. I'm laughing my butt off for them).

[YoungMiyagi]

Belts are not a bad thing ... they hold your Karate Gi in place!

[superleeds]

It's a nice point of referance in my opinion. Besides that, belts have no value really. I do in a way like the old okinawan system better than Funakoshi sensei's.

[Tote]

Originally, in Okinawa, there were only 2 belts, white and black.

 

The belt system was not introduced untill 1922 in japan. There where three belts white, brown and black. It was started by mr kano(judo) and when funakoshi used his dojo to teach karate out of he started to use gi(s) and belts. The belt system was never used in karate untill eighty years ago.

[karatekid1975]

I agree with CheekyMusician on this one. Good post

[angel]

I think belts really fire us up because in a place where there is hierarchy we feel good. We have inferiors and equals and sempai. We learn from seniors and teach our inferior. This is good.

 

but on the other hand belts arent everything. But i like hierarchy

[Sasori_Te]

inferiors? I'm not picking on you angel but you prove part of my point here. There are no inferiors or superiors in a karate class.There are people with more and less knowledge, but they all have the same goal (ideally anyway) and that is to increase that knowledge. I teach and I don't think that instructors are superior to their students. I happen to have more knowledge about what it is we're learning and I'm in charge of the class but I don't think of myself as superior. This alludes to our status seeking society. If I misunderstood what you were trying to say then by all means please explain. Thanks for the replies everyone.