Well, personally I think it's a question of balance. A good school or art should market itself, it's good for the art for more people to train at good schools. To market a school as good when it's actually rubbish - that is bad but it's still good business sense. To say marketting is evil and I will never advertise because Taekwondo is not a business, it's a way of life is a bit naive and ultimately bad for the art.
Like anything in marketing, the item/product/subject has to do what it claims without too much hype. That said, things like tenets, slogans, semi clubs (like Lil Dragons, Black Belt Jr, etc.) are formed. As long as it is known that these are poducts, not martial arts-in essence. Thanks. The subject of tenets and martial arts has been a pet peeve for me. It started when a fellow martial artist/friend and I were discusssing it. I used to be on a "tenet" kick until he opened my eyes. I realised, tenets were a quasi ploy to demonstrate another value. I realised-remembered, when I went through a few arts and visited many back between the 60's-late 70's, there were no tenets, per se' to recite. My former teachers of different arts nevered bothered to instill tenets or recite these. They knew it was a subject of morals/ethics that parents were responsible for. They basically told me-us who had studied back then, to use control, non excessive force, if we ever had to use our skills. There were no sub-clubs or groups within the school-class. We simply showed up for practice. In any marketing ploy or campaign, sometimes the item/product/subject does not live up to the expectations. As when any item/product/subject some people are satisfied, others may not be. Those whom have a bad experience will negate and slander all with prejudice. Tae Kwon Do, once out of Korea, became a business. My former Korean TKD instructor, came straight out of Korea with Korean government funds to open as many schools as he could. He, like others, fell into the belt factory trap because there were not enough time to wait for people to get promoted in order to open up more schools to flourish the art. This was a problem in the beginning decades ago. However, as I continue to visit any newly opened martial art school, of any type, I found more TKD schools coming up to quality nowadays. Of course, gearing to the youth, as their "bread and butter".
I think TKD was always a business, even in SK before it was exported 1st by Gen Choi & on such a wide scale. There were epic battles in SK over the leadership & direction of TKD's development. There were reasons for that, among them = power, ego & MONEY
I will say one thing regarding rapid promotion: it's not always unjustified. A lot of people will say, "You got your black belt in two years? Ridiculous!" But the question, really, is what exactly they did for those two years. Someone who trains twice week may not really be on a level to deserve that rank in that time, but someone who trains 5 times a week . . . well, they will literally have 2 1/2 times more training in the same period of time.
I couldn't agree more. A BB to me & to Gen Choi, which is where I get much of my guidance from, is simply someone who has grasped the basics. Just like writing, you must learn your respective alphabet 1st. Once you have the letters of the alphabet down, you get a BB. Then you learn to make words, sentences, so you can go on to write your own stories. I can guarantee that if you (the generic you) comes to me for training, I can get you to I Dan BB in a year. Provided that you train 6 days a week, for 4 hours a day making a total of 1,248 hours. Of course you must be talented & dedicated. You must earn it & I would only give it to you if you eraned it. I then would turn around this challenge & say: Why can you not get someone who trained diligently 4 hours daily, 6 days a week for 1,248 hours of hard work & sweat to a I Dan beginner BB level?
^^^ I don't know, but honestly, I wish I could get there quickly because I want to compete at the Dan level.
I can be a little more harsh than that. Knowing that whoever can make words and sentences, may not be ready to write their own stories. This may take more study for some. I like the idea of earning it. But not a personal offense/insult to you, this may depend of the information or type of training. For extreme hypothetical example; Say Joe's Jumble Judo Gym (hope no Joes take offense) instructs in what he believes as the fine art of Judo. But Joe, has not actually studied Judo to the fullest or is self taught (no tangent). Joe decides to open a school and upon his own syllabus, ranks people and awards these people what he believes a bonefide rank and what he or they, believe they had earned it. Then, Joe’s student, Jim, finds another Judo school or martial art. Jim's skills are bad. Poor Jim was trained by Sloppy Joe. Poor Jim wasted 6 days a week, for 4 hours a day making a total of 1,248 hours working his bun off earning a rank holding as much value as a plain bun without hearty meat. Not quite sure I understand this. Please explain a little more. Thanks
Well I am not sure if you understood my analogy. It pre-supposses that the person is talented, works hard, studies diligently AND grasps the basics they were taught. TKD according to Gen Choi was a lifelong venture. The color belt levels were simply to allow a beginner to grasp the basics. The learning came after they had the basics down pat. So you can not write, if you don't know the alphabet. Now, stick to the alphabet. If you trained only the letters of the alphabet, 6 days a week, 4 hours a day & I only studied 3 days a week for an hour at a time, all other things being equal, who would learn & progress faster? I am only talking about Gen choi's TKD & his syllabus laid out clearly in his 15 volume set of Encyclopedia of TKD, which IMO has no equal in any other MA for its detail & content. So if I am a truly qualified international instructor & you are a talented, hard working, diligent student, I would have no problem whatsoever in getting you to grasp the basics in 1 year, if you trained 6 days a week, 4 hours a day for a total of 1,248 hours. No problem at all. Now this does not mean that you will be better than some other BB in another style that puts more emphasis on the weight of a I Dan BB, requiring some 10 years of training. I am strictly talking about ITF TKD.
Quote: Originally Posted by TKDstudent I then would turn around this challenge & say: Why can you not get someone who trained diligently 4 hours daily, 6 days a week for 1,248 hours of hard work & sweat to a I Dan beginner BB level? Hopefully some of my above replies have helped to clarify this. In my system of TKD that I do & study deeply, which is governed by the ITF & created by Gen Choi & his soldiers, a I Dan BB is simply proficent in the basics. Nothing more. They are now ready to learn, as the basics or preliminaries are out of the way. So in the context of this setting, if you were a talented, hard working diligent student who put in that type of training in & did NOT get a BB in 1 year, I would be wondering what the heck was wrong with your instructor, if they could not get such a hard working, talented & dligent student t grasp the basics in 1,248 hours.
TKDstudent, I fully understood your post #326 The beauty of belonging to a specific are, and moreso, a specific org, is the consistancy. The fact if a student from the same art or org, had put in more time, and has not achieved to a certain level or criteria, of course, someone with say, you level of skill in instructing will wonder or question why is the student with the same sllyabus or same hours-days of training, etc., not up to par. This is exactly what I meant, the instructor has everything to do if he had not properly trained the student, no matter of the hours or days matched from this poorly trained student to one of yours.
Whichever way you look at it two years for a blackbelt is ridiculous. The logic of this is flawed because its how these 'intensive courses' begin, train hard for a short period of time, as a pose to discipline yourself to train regularly for a long period of time. The latter requires more spirit in my experience. Martial arts takes time to master, if I were to practice for 8 hours a day, 7 days a week for a whole year, I would probably have more hours than the average martial arts black belt, but I very much doubt I woud have had the life exepriences, and mental endurance that requires the discipline to train regularly for many years. This is what really makes a martial artist.
I think TKD student has already stated it correctly, in that, with TKD, the black belt only means that the basics have been mastered and the time for deeper learning should begin. So you can't master the BASICS in 2 years, training 5 days a week? 4 days a week even? If you go to a good MT gym, they can have you taking full contact fights in 6 months. Personally, I think that if you bust your ass then you should be able to move from grade to grade in an average of about 3 months per level, which would make it a few months over 2 years to get to black. Another thing to consider is prior experience in martial arts. Someone who has a base in, say, Shotokan karate (or really any striking art), should be able to progress considerably faster than someone who's never thrown a kick in their life. A lot of the base skills and ingrained knowledge of body mechanics will already be there.
I think the basics are so very essential in anything that is designed for fighting, that two years is not enough time to spend on such things. I am yet to come accross anyone who has mastered the basics of thier martial art, although many people believe they have done. Three months per level is simply not enough, this is sounding like a poor cover up for a mcdojo style of awarding belts IMHO. Prior experience will rightly and appropriatley translate, I know of a few people who have double graded due to a black belt in another system that crosses over with the one they are grading in.
Well sadly even in my ITF there are terrible in-consistiencies & many who do not know, understand or follow the syllabus. With that said, my proposed scenario put forth as an example or analogy, pre-supposes that I am a qualified international instructor & that the student IS a talented, hard working, diligent person wh sweat & learned the basics. If they didn't, or I was not successful in sharing & guiding her, then all bets are off & she did not promote, many times along the way at any number of the 9 gup tests she would have faced. So I am not sure of your counter points/replies ???????? If they did not achieve, were not up to par or I as an instructor didn't do my job, they would not have promoted, my fault or theirs, but this was not the scenario I outlined. In order to engage in this type of exchange, we must try to sort out & remove variables which may affect outcomes, so the illustration comes through intact, jmo
I would not argue with you, as you have an apparently different definition or concept of what a BB is. That is fine, but you are talking oranges & I am talking apples, or vice versa A BB is not a master. In the ITF it takes some 25 years of diligent study to reach that level. The principle founder of TKD wanted & hoped that TKD would be a life long experience by all who started training in his system. Life experiences only do occur over time, agree 100%. That is what seperates the levels of BB Dan. A I Dan ITF BB is simply a beginner student who has grasped the basics & is now ready to set off on a life time of learning. Kinda like getting the car ready for a long trip You are
Yes but I never wrote mastered the basic, but rather grasp the basics. Did you ever see a bginner student who throws a side kick like they do a turning kick? They often don't know the difference, they don't even know the proper foot positions for each, as they are very different, with some having more than 1 foot position. This is grasping & it must be done on a more than accpetable level. By the time a prospective candidate even is considered to sit for a comprehensive BB exam, she must be able to do at least 4 good mutiple kicks for either of the above, along with flying versions of same, minus the mutiple kicking, as that would be reserved for BBs, along with flying twin foot kicking. I also make a clear distinction that I am ony talking about an ITF BB, as we have that type of training program outlined for us in the syllabus. However it is rarely if ever enacted, as most studetns can not train 6 days a week, 4 hours a day, for a whole year. However I stand by my statement, that if I have a talented, dedciated hard working student who will engage diligently in such a training program, after 1,248 hours, they will have earned a I Dan BB. I will insure that & I mean earn it, sweat for it, not pay for it. College level courses are also set my time hours, credit hours. You take 18-21 or more credits a semester, go in the summer, while I lay at the beach after taking 12 credits. We both pass our clases, who will graduate 1st? Who will enter graduate school 1st to earn that masters degree? Easy to see & easy to understand. It happens all the time, in all areas of learning.
I agree 100%. However in my MA of original TKD we spend a lifetime on working on the basics & fundamental movements. Our basics get harder & more complex as you advance up the rank structure. Can't do a double front snap kick, if you can't do a front snap kick. We have 4 tools for just a front snap kick. You can't do a flying side kick unless you can do a proper side kick. We have 7 types of side kicks. Can't do a flying turning kick mutiple times in the air without landing if you can't do a turning kick. can't do a twin foot high kick if you don't even know what a high kick is. Our SD or formal hoosinsul has 3 motions. You learn the 1st basic motion of SD, attacking motion as a white belt. The other 2, releasing & breaking motions come in at red belt level to give you more options. You can't fight more than one opponent, if you can't handle one! Free sparring comes in at blue belt level, as you must have some basics down, before you engage in an anything (free) goes sparring. Of course, after BB you must engage in pre-arranged free sparring, model sparring & foot technique sparring. Your free sparing should also come in different combinations. like 1:2, 2:5, 3:8, etc. I can assure you that the program I have described has rarely been implemented, as rarely does a school have such a class schedule or a student will have the time committment. For the sake of the illustration, please do not insert mcdojo, as I can assure you it is not, plus it has already been rules out in the scenario provided. Please do not respond with points that are outside of the pre-suppositions provided. I am aware of phony claims to pay for a BB in a 1 year program. I am not talking about that. Few if any, ever pass a test outright, as there is always something that can be worked on. No one is perfect & everyone will have certain shortfalls or mental mishaps. Our testing process is designed to purposely to evaluate weak areas & areas or aspects that need more work/ I am not talking about a transer student. We have built in provisions for that as well. I am simply talking about a dedicated, talented student who is guided by a competent teacher & works hard over the 1,248 hours in the year, who earned a BB because they grasped the basics. I think people are applying their standard or concept of what a BB is. You train for 10 years & I train for 10 years, we should both be around the same, fighting wise, regardless if I am a 2nd Dan & you a 4th dan!
This is the same concept behind the style I study, blackbelt is the beggining, which is why the kyus are numbers downward and the dans numbered upward, this doesnt change the fact it takes seven years to earn that black belt. Agreed basics are practiced all the way through, the key difference here is that basics in this TKD lead on to more extreme movements, whereas a good martial artist should use the basics in all thier fighting, the basics dont need to lead on to great acrobatic movements, the basics are enough arent they? I insterted mcdojo, because I am yet to come accross anything to suggest otherwise and system that offers the potential to earn blackbelt in two years is worth keeping an eye on, the fact that, that system is TKD just adds to my suspicion, simply because it is known for having a large number of mcdojos. No I assure you, it depends greatly on the system we are learning and the style we study. Blackbelts are given away far too easily these days IMO. I cannot agree with what your saying, but I understand it better now so thankyou.
Yes & your stated fact that it takes 7 years to earn a BB proves that your concept of what a BB is varies greatly from Gen Choi's, so apples & oranges! I'll flipped the question to get at my point/concept: It takes your students 7 years to earn a BB. So lets say for illustration purposes the average training shcedule is 3 times a week for an hour or so each session. All things being the same, equal, 1 student trains double that, 6 days a week, 4 hours a day. is it not logical to conclude that they will be ready for BB before those who do the 3 days a week, for about an hour? And if you still insisted that they wait 7 years, does logical & simpler common sense dictate that the person who trained more than double the others, who have achieved more? True & I only added some acrobatic typs of movements, as we have basic or fundamental movements that vary for each level, as far as degree of difficulty goes. The basics all have to be applied & in a SD setting, their experience & capability hopefully will expand via free sparring where anything goes, ground etc & that they will also be tested in mutiple settings. It is all about SD, physically, with much more added in. Very difficult to compare accross systems or approaches to training. That being said, I think our students would be roughly equal after the same 7 years of training, except mine my wear a higher/different belt. I am not focusing or getting hung up on belts, which are very subjective at the least! I am not talking about 2 years, but rather 1,248 hours ammassed in a 1 year period, dedicated to learning our basics, so our system can then move to the next step of instruction. I personally do not think it is a fair criticism to apply outside terms or concepts to a specific set of circumstances that I have outlined & is well documented, as a way of showing that the described system is flawed or weak. You do not have to agree totally, but your critique should be limited to the system proposed & not outside methods or goals - as that is apples & oranges. But we do agree that BB are given out far too easily. I am not talking about that at all, in no way shape or form. However you & your view or vision of what a BB is, is simply not part of a defined scenario. I would like to think that our students would stand side by side after 7 years & look pretty much the same!
