About belts

[luihu]

Probably everyone of us is in some point or another wondered about the belt system, which categorizes students.

What are the good points and bad points in this system, when we think about it from the view of training and the ethics, which are brought to dojos with'em? Is it along the lines of budo-thinking, that we should keep beginners contesting from different colored belts? Also funny thought is that usually the highest ranked students are placed in front of the class, and beginners are in back. Is this kind of motivating necessary? On students view this is little bit awkward, cos it is possible, that beginners can't see clearly what the teacher is demonstrating.

Tell me your opinions, because I am interested to hear them.

József Pap

[Jeff Hamacher]

my understanding of things is that the use of coloured belts is a relatively modern phenomenon, and that it's supposed to be a response to concerns over motivation, much as you point out, Josef (i'm sorry, but my computer can't display the proper spelling of your name). i think that many present-day students want a clear sense of progress in their martial art studies, and the various belts provide that structure. a lot of educators would agree that this explicit feedback is a powerful teaching aid.

of course, in some martial arts the training uniform doesn't allow for a coloured belt, and sometimes there's no belt at all. some may argue that it's not necessary to have coloured belts because everyone in a dojo should know everybody's rank and level of seniority. others may point out that all the coloured belts do is encourage egotistic behaviour amongst students and degrades the quality of training. i feel that all of these opinions are valid, but i think that they ignore another important truth regarding training in japanese martial arts.

it's often said that the japanese have a very hierarchical society, and it's very true indeed. any time you find japanese in a group they will consistently organize themselves in rank according to age, job position, or whatever criterion applies to the situation. this ranking habit means that, even in the modern age, the japanese have reportedly gone to the extreme of determining "places of honour" inside an automobile (the seat behind the driver) or an elevator (when facing out, the rear right corner). in that sense, it's no surprise that there is a predetermined fashion in which everyone behaves at the dojo. i think that understanding and abiding by this vertical social organization is a crucial component of training. if teachers or senior students abuse their position of power it will certainly detract from training, but when everyone shows the appropriate level of respect and compassion for everyone else, the system works very well.

in response to your question, Josef, i do think that it's a little strange for juniors to be sat behind seniors if this blocks their view of a teacher's demonstration. normally in my aikido class, we line up in seniority from right to left at the beginning and end of class, but for any demonstration during class students sit where they want and we try to sit so that everyone can clearly see what the teacher is doing. in my jo classes, my teacher rarely demonstrates for everyone as a group. he watches everyone's training and corrects mistakes as he finds them. in each pair of students, seniors correct juniors. naturally, the most senior students train closest to the shoumen, while the most junior students train furthest away.

sorry for the long-windedness, but i hope this helps.

[Mike McLaren]

Belt colors seem to be a touchy issue at the best of times.

I have been taught that you should be able to tell a persons rank by their skill and how they behave.
This fits in with the Japanese way of thinking, by that I mean if you are a shodan you have a certain level of skills and specific expectations of how you should behave, as does a white belt, a salaryman, a doctor, etc.
Society has placed those expectations and most people adhere to them. That's what helps things run smoothly. It is not that you are better or worse than the next person, that is just where you stand in the hierarchy.
Westerners on the other hand tend to look at the outward symbols of status without taking into account all the other expectations. "Wow he's a black belt" or "he's only a white belt." People place a more egotistical value on where they stand according to their belt colors and will put too much emphasis on them. It's not the color of the belt that should matter, it's the person.
My personal opinion is that the people who place such a high value on rank are missing the point, it's just like that pencil mark on the wall - it should show how much you have grown, not how better you are.

Mike McLaren

[mrmonkey]

Gentlemen,

In my experience there are black belts
who say the "right things" at cocktail parties,
and black belts that say the
"wrong things" at cocktail parties.
Then again, there are some black belts who
have never been to cocktail parties.
That is quite a shame. :D

Eric Hedman
Oakland, CA
----------------------------
renshu, renshu, renshu...
...and when you are finished...
...renshu:smash:

[Don Cunningham]

This is a magazine article I wrote about this subject and thought it might be interesting to some members:

Belt colors and ranking tradition (http://www.concentric.net/~Budokai/articles/belts.htm)

[Joseph Svinth]

Peter Boylan's ideas on the subject appear here:

http://ejmas.com/tin/tinart_boylan_0901.htm

Summarized, for those of you without time to follow links:

"Rank, schmank. I wish everyone would just go back to training, and maybe issue a certificate when people are ready to teach. Everything else is just a way of paying for the organization's bills. "

[Fred Stakem]

That is a real interesting question. I will take my stab at it.

Mr Hamacher said:
it's often said that the japanese have a very hierarchical society, and it's very true indeed. any time you find japanese in a group they will consistently organize themselves in rank according to age, job position, or whatever criterion applies to the situation.

As far as having japanese implications I beleive it is the exact
opposite. Although asian society, from the castes of india and the
samurai class of japan, are highly ordered, I beleive the idea is
more western. Jigoro Kano was first and foremost an educator
and the forming of judo was important in giving japan a moralistic
method of training its citizens. Judo was the first non-western
sport adopted into the olympics and Kano pushed strongly for its adoption into the sports arena and the world. Like the grades in
school the belt system was intended to group like individuals
together for safety of the participants. This would better facilitate
its grow and adoption throughout the world.

As far as ethics are concerned, I am not sure the correct enemy
is being attacked. Because and individual misuses the belt
system for their own gain is it not the fault of the individual and not the system. The belt system is not at fault, but the way the
individual looks at belt system. They see it as the end result.
'The flower...not the fruit'--as the daoist's would say. Maybe
this is an effect of our modern culture(sorry this is off
the post but.............I won't say western
culture because it happens just as readily in the east as the
west.....I won't feed the anti-western attitude sometimes
prevelent in eastern academics)
It sometimes seems we are in a youth driven culture that is
more impressed with imagery than substinance. This is only
more reason to work harder at making the system work
than giving up on it. The more people work at making sure
the laws or ideas of the belt system match the expectations,
the more others will trust it as a good system. Which means
that the teacher may have to deny the black belt to Tommy the
ten year old, but the lessons in controlling his ego he can take with him for a lifetime.

Personally, having practice both japanese and chinese martial arts
I have seen it from both sides. The structure and the structureless
. To contradict my post, I personally perfer the less stuctured system. But in case you haven't found out the grass isn't greener
on the other side. An asshole is an asshole whether he wears a
black belt or not.

Fred Stakem

[mrmonkey]

Lord Robert Baden Powell who started the Boy Scouts took boys from different levels of english society to a far off location and put them all in the same outfits and made them eat the same crummy food and they all had a blast. The only differences that could remain at that point were levels of health, education and ability.
It was easier, but not a walk in the park, to let the boys sort out who had to know what and who needed to be taught what based upon their ability to complete tasks as a group.
The boys had to be taught basic scouting and communication skills initially all at the same time.
But there was always an a series of institutional admonitions to be kind, trustworthy, and helpful(among other things stated and unstated). So successive groups of people could come in and feel alright not being at the same place because the ideal of the people in longer helping.

I think that this kind of atmosphere is one where rank can exist with equity. Without problems that come from social promotion or caring about who sits where as you bow in.

Sometimes it bothers me when I come across shodan people who can't make basic stuff happen. But I know that if I were teaching them I would try to hold them to the same standard and the same special treatment I got in my testing and awarding of the most precious thing I have in relation to martial arts that someone else granted me. The experience of knowing that this stuff that I am learning can work.

Eric Hedman
Oakland, CA
--------------------------
renshu, renshu, renshu.....
and when that's done....
more renshu.......

:smash:

[Jeff Hamacher]

Originally posted by Fred Stakem
As far as having japanese implications I believe it is the exact
opposite. Although asian society, from the castes of India and the
samurai class of Japan, are highly ordered, I believe the idea is
more western. Jigoro Kano was first and foremost an educator
and the forming of judo was important in giving Japan a moralistic
method of training its citizens. (...) Like the grades in
school the belt system was intended to group like individuals
together for safety of the participants. This would better facilitate
its growth and adoption throughout the world.
first of all, Fred, please feel free to call me Jeff; i know i get formal sometimes and refer to people on-board as "Mr. So-and-so", but ya ain't gotta stand on ceremony with me.:)

i agree to a certain extent with what you say, but i'm also inclined to point out a couple of things. Don's link upthread is an excellent read and i'd strongly suggest you check it out (thanks again for the tip, Don!), especially since he got his info from some very well-placed sources. some parts of the article suggest that the creation of a system of variously coloured belts may in fact have been influenced by western thinking, or even a western "product", so to speak. since that's the main topic of this thread i'll cede to that aspect of your argument.

bear in mind, however, that, if i follow your logic precisely, Kano-sensei adopted a kyu-dan structure in his ranking so that it might appeal to potential students outside of japan based on his own perception of western ideas. whether or not his perception was accurate becomes the heart of the matter. i heard an italian student of martial arts (kyudo in particular) speak at a seminar a few years back. he argued that the "sportification" of japanese martial arts was not the fault of "outside pressures" but rather the choice of japanese teachers who believed that, unless their structure was modified, the arts wouldn't appeal to foreigners. was the coloured belt system created by japanese martial arts teachers based on false assumptions about foreign societies? that's something i'd like to know more about.

where we don't use coloured belts at all (like in my jo group), we still line up, train, and speak to each other in a way which accords with our date of initiation. we maintain a strict sempai-kohai structure in our group regardless of dan grade, e.g. there are two of us in the dojo who are novices and hold no grade, but the other student is my kohai and will never "outrank" me even though we may progress through dan grades together. in that sense, the creation or adoption of a coloured belt system is a reflection of japanese (or if you prefer, asian) thinking on social seniority, or in the very least such a system is not contrary to that principle. at the same time, the school analogy that you propose above, Fred, is apt, and i think the multiple progress levels shown by coloured belts is kinda western-flavoured.

i'm outta time, but i'm looking forward to any further posts.

[Fred Stakem]

Jeff said-- bear in mind, however, that, if i follow your logic precisely, Kano-sensei adopted a kyu-dan structure in his ranking so that it might appeal to potential students outside of japan based on his own perception of western ideas. whether or not his perception was accurate becomes the heart of the matter.

I am just an amatuer on japanese history so don't take my words
as facts. Most of my knowledge on Kano comes from his judo book
and the recent biography done of him. Other than those two
sources, I haven't found much material on him beyond the
general.

I do think that Kano was trying to appeal to the west, but not
as appeasment sort of speak, but because he truely beleived
in some of the principles of a western liberal education for the
masses. I think some martial artists gloss over the backwardness
of Japan when Perry opened the gates. The idea of educating the
masses is a modern concept that was often not the case in many
soceities...ecspecially eastern. And sports were an important part
of a moral and physical education.

Although it has been alluded
to that the chinese used sports for education, in recent times
it has been a western ideal. If you read a lot of the material
written about western sports at the turn of the century they
read a lot like some of the ideals people talk about in budo.
I recently read a history of college football, and people would
be surprised to learned that some hailed football as a moral
game that helped get rid of drinking and sex on college
campuses.......this was written at the turn of the century.
Until recently most people would be suprised of the frequent
use of ethics as the main reason to practice western sports.
I have seen no reference to similiar ideas in asia before Kano.

I am sure Kano didn't disregard all things japanese, but his life
is strangely modern for his time. He openly sought to bring
western teaching methods to japan. He worked diligently
to get judo recognized by the olympic comitee, of which he
was a member. He sought to bring the olympics to japan, which
they eventually did. He toured the world promoting judo. And
he spoke good english.....not to shabby for a man born a mere
40 years after japan opened its doors to the west. And did I
mention he sought world peace.....he reminds me of the
worldly administrators of the british empire a century before....
one foot in the west and one in the east.

As far as the act of lining up in class and other modern budo
things people take as custom...in a similiar post in the koryu
section I questioned the role of western military methods in
some of these customs. The japanese were quick to rebadge
chinese boxing/okinawan karate as a japanese method
when it came to the mainland. Western military methods
were openly sought out by the young japanese goverment and
could have played a role in budo. At the turn of the century
the japanese were gloating over there defeat of a western
nation(russia) by using western methods.

Jeff said--
the creation or adoption of a coloured belt system is a reflection of japanese (or if you prefer, asian) thinking on social seniority,

In some respects I agree because at higher levels I have heard
that ranking is based more on seniority. I beleive I read after
5th dan in judo the ranking is more based on teaching than
mere technical skill. BUT......think of it this way. A 22 year old
peasant black belt would have seniority over an older less
experienced samuria 33 year old. In Kano's system skill was
taken as the defining structure not class. I am sure that pissed
off a few of the people who practice koryu at that time. In a
heavily chinese influence society like japan the break down
of confucian paternalism I am sure shook the stability of society.
What really amazes me is how the japanese were able to
accept modern western ideas so quickly. And to still have
a stable society unlike a lot of contries that try to modernize.
They did in decades what it will take china and india to do in centuries.

Fred Stakem

[Jeff Hamacher]

Originally posted by Fred Stakem
I am just an amateur on japanese history so don't take my words as facts.
i don't, Fred, i treat them respectfully as your opinion or understanding of the objective truth, something that i might stand to learn from. i'm no expert either, so i need all the "larnin'" i can get.

I do think that Kano was trying to appeal to the west, but not as appeasement so to speak, but because he truly believed in some of the principles of a western liberal education for the masses.
that's an excellent point. again, the carefully graded syllabus and attendant rank levels found in modern martial arts schools is definitely not a traditional japanese approach to education. you probably know more about Kano's intentions than i do, 'cuz i've never read about him.

And sports were an important part of a moral and physical education.
do you mean sports were important to education in eastern societies, such as japan? i had the impression that japan kind of imported sports as such, and that physical activity was either heavy labour or martial training but not "mere games".

If you read a lot of the material written about western sports at the turn of the century they read a lot like some of the ideals people talk about in budo. I recently read a history of college football, and people would be surprised to learned that some hailed football as a moral game that helped get rid of drinking and sex on college campuses.......this was written at the turn of the century.
now that's hysterical!!!

Until recently most people would be suprised of the frequent use of ethics as the main reason to practice western sports. I have seen no reference to similiar ideas in asia before Kano.
i think you're wrong there. as far back as Musashi and the Book of Five Rings, japanese martial artists have been talking about martial training as "spiritual" training (although not explicity religious training) or personal development. while he did not equate the two, Musashi considered training in either swordsmanship or Zen as ways to polish the spirit. and what about philosophical precepts such as "katsujinken" ("the sword that gives life")? i don't know if martial masters from other asian countries held similar views, but many of the japanese masters did.

I am sure Kano didn't disregard all things japanese, but his life is strangely modern for his time. (...) he reminds me of the worldly administrators of the british empire a century before....one foot in the west and one in the east.
perhaps his thinking was modern, but i also believe that a great many japanese were just as anxious to "figure out the West" so as to ensure that japan wouldn't find itself "inferior" to other nations. even today the japanese as a people harbour a halfway paranoid view of foreign countries, constantly wondering where they stand in comparison. sometimes they cover their uncertainty with overconfident talk of japanese superiority, but rather like canadians (a poke at the land of my birth), they still suffer from a nagging fear that other countries might have it better.

As far as the act of lining up in class and other modern budo things people take as custom, (...) Western military methods were openly sought out by the young japanese goverment and could have played a role in budo.
without being able to speak authoritatively, i doubt this proposition. the post-Meiji-Restoration drive to absorb western knowledge or thinking was simply a matter of finding expedients to achieve military, technological, and social superiority, or at least parity, with foreign nations. the boys in my school still wear uniforms based on 19th century Prussian models, and standing rigidly at attention is definitely a western habit (the japanese would never have thought up such an inefficient posture, according to one source i've heard), but the vertical, quasi-military structure of the society, i.e. it's underlying principles, are almost purely Confucian. it was easy for japan to adopt vestiges of western military culture because the social temperament was so ready to accept them.

A 22 year old peasant black belt would have seniority over an older less experienced samurai 33 year old. In Kano's system skill was taken as the defining structure not class.
although your analogy has absolutely no basis in reality, it's a very interesting way to present your point. i know i raised the issue in a thread regarding he term "sensei", but it's a question of recognizing how greater societal changes have affected the way that people study or train in various vocations. it may simply be my mistaken impression, but in japan's days of yore, a person's level of professional seniority generally ran in line with their age, i.e. a younger carpenter would consistently have less actual experience and ability than an older carpenter because both would have started in the trade at roughly the same age. i believe the same would have been true of martial artists. in modern times, however, people train in martial arts only sometimes as a profession (even though it's a "cultural" rather than a "military" pursuit) and more often as a "hobby", so to speak. people's ages or social positions may not have anything to do with their ability or rank within their martial art, so the belt system or even ranking without coloured belts is one way to keep track of student progress.

somehow, Josef, i fear we've drifted pretty far from your original question, but in short, the modern system of smaller, more manageable progress levels in martial arts training is, i think, better for the majority of students. it may not be a traditional japanese approach, but as a teacher i think it addresses concerns about student motivation where the "shut up and train!" method fails to do so. as long as the instructor doesn't let student egos get too inflated over rank, the downsides of coloured belts can be minimized.

[Joseph Svinth]

Without going into theories of international sport and Kano's ideas on same, as it would be a very long discussion requiring many footnotes, how is this for a theory: honorific language.

Source for speculation: Agnes Niyekawa, _Minimum Essential Politeness: A Guide to the Japanese Honorific Language_ (Tokyo: Kodansha International, 1991)

Kano was at the Peer's Academy, not some YMCA in Osaka. Thus the proper form of address would have been a matter of considerable import to these young men (and their teachers, who doubtless wanted to stay employed). So, provide people ranking by the comparatively egalitarian white and black belt, and lo! Instantly and at a glance, one knows which forms of address to use, and thus can easily move along to dialogue such as "How the devil did you do that?" or "Sir, would you work with me?"

[Fred Stakem]

I know we are straying away from the question a bit, but since
Kano's belt system was part of a drastic change in the way
martial arts were taught it is relevent in looking at the way
teaching ma has changed. As far as ethics go, József's question
brings up the larger debate of 'have the modern ma delivered
on their ethical foundations'

Before I try to answer József I will offer a quick clarification.


do you mean sports were important to education in eastern societies, such as japan?

No, I meant to say that in the west there was a time when
sports were thought to teach fair play. I think it is still there,
but we could do better. I was getting at the point that
physical education use to be a education ideal instead of the
modern method of 15 minutes of kickball.

as far back as Musashi and the Book of Five Rings, japanese martial artists have been talking about martial training as "spiritual" training

True...I probably could have worded that one better.
It comes back to the fact that Kano did not teach a select
group. The book of five rings is a good spiritual example,
but I would contend was not on the reading list of the
average japanese farmer in Musashi's day....unlike judo that was
eventually taught in the high schools.

József said-
Is it along the lines of budo-thinking, that we should keep beginners contesting from different colored belts?

I am not sure I understand this....If you mean contesting as
far as sparring with each other, I think that is more of a
practical concern than ethical one. It would have to be the
teachers best judgement.
If you meant contesting or fighting over rank in a dojo
(which happens far to often) I think it is an ethical question.
Personally I wouldn't throw out a belt system because
people are to egotistical to follow it.

József said-
Also funny thought is that usually the highest ranked students are placed in front of the class, and beginners are in back.

If you are doing basic drills in a karate class I see nothing wrong
with this. I use to have an instuctor that would move around
during class and make sure senior students were placed near
beginers when they did something new. That is one way to
approach the problem. Personally I think the students need
more hands on teaching anyway...which leaves out a lot
of huge karate classes I have seen. Quality over quantity.
If students can't see what is going on and don't know why
they are doing certain things, you can only hope that they will
learn on their own. Usually that doesn't happen, but I have
seen enough of these people become teachers later on
spreading the little that they know. I don't know if that
would be considered morally right or wrong, but it is
sloppy teaching.

[hyaku]

I think we have to bear in mind that from a Japanese point of view there are not thousands of adults running about wearing coloured belts and any westerner would be sadly mislead to think so. Its mostly small kids biking or running into the local dojo that wear them.There are in fact very few adults here in the basic learning process of learning coloured belt related MA. Really the more Japanese way of doing thing is that every body wears the same. Bearing this in mind everybody in the dojo is wearing a uniform and black belt like a business suit. Japanese are possesed with uniforms of any description. They even wear jeans and a polo shirt as a casual uniform.

When the system was thought of I am sure that they had no idea that there would be such a great western interest and that other groups would adopt the system. A pretty strange sensation when some stands in front of you with a belt that says I am higher/ better/ more practiced with you.

The main modernized aspect is not so much the belts but the dan grade. There seems to be a prepossesion with the phrase "What dan are you taking next" There are dan grades for calligraphy and other inumerable pursuits.

More traditional schools are quick to tell you " We dont have dan grades"

I think we must seriously consider belts whatever the colour or dan grades as a mark of achievement and not of seniority.

I suppose thats easy for me to say having taken so many dan grades. Then again the arts I pursue now do not use the system, but I still feel the rush of the challenge for self improvement and its a long time since I took all those certificates off the wall, rolled them up and put them in the cupboard

Hyakutake Colin http://www.bunbun.ne.jp/~sword

[Jeff Hamacher]

Originally posted by Fred Stakem
I know we are straying away from the question a bit, but since Kano's belt system was part of a drastic change in the way martial arts were taught it is relevant in looking at the way teaching ma has changed.
oh, we've strayed, alright, but that's part of the fun, isn't it? i agree that your points regarding the sea change in martial arts training and the development of the belt system are relevant to the current discussion.

It comes back to the fact that Kano did not teach a select group. The book of five rings is a good spiritual example, but I would contend was not on the reading list of the average japanese farmer in Musashi's day....unlike judo that was eventually taught in the high schools.

hmmm ... i'm not sure how to respond to this comment because it seems to have lost the connection to the discussion's point of origin. you said that, while western societies felt that sports contained a kind of moral or ethical component, asian societies did not feel that same way about their "athletic pursuits", at least as far as you had read. i responded by saying that, to my knowledge, the only athletics in pre-Meiji japan would have been martial training (of course, manual labour counts as physical activity but not precisely athletics) and that furthermore since the beginning of the Edo period, martial arts were most definitely thought to assist personal, moral, or spiritual development, much like what you wrote regarding western beliefs about western sports.

i grant you that Kano-sensei's approach to teaching seems very egalitarian in comparison to pre-Meiji times, and that the adoption of a belt system as well as open teaching of martial techniques signalled a huge change in martial training. but what exactly does the comment about farmers not reading Musashi have to do with the moral or spiritual backbone of japanese martial arts? even though there were only designated classes of people allowed by shogunal law to train in martial arts or to carry weapons, this doesn't mean that japanese MA lacked the "ethical" component of which i spoke upthread. training was secretive, exclusionary and elitist, to be sure, but not lacking in "moral fibre".

i also wanted to thank Mr. Svinth for the language theory, because i think it's central to this discussion. the hierarchical nature of japanese society is not lost in the coloured belt system at all, and the issue of language, culture and social interaction is paramount to gaining an understanding of japanese behaviour. much as Joe said, knowing clearly who your listener is makes it much easier to choose how to speak to them, and to japanese people nothing could be more important than speaking (or in many cases not speaking) appropriately.

think about how this works in the "new age" of egalitarian, open martial arts training. the chances of coming across a stranger in the dojo are much higher than before, and yet the coloured rag around their waist tells you right away where you stand in comparison to this person. immediately you know with confidence how to speak and act appropriately when dealing with them, and so embarrassing or offensive moments are avoided (another big japanese priority). the hierarchical structure is firmly intact, but it's just manifesting itself in a different way. western influences or thinking probably play a big role in the coloured belt system, but i still think it fits very neatly with more traditional japanese attitudes.

PS Hyaku-sama, my post got so lengthy that i forgot to thank you as well for your insights. i especially liked your comments about "uniforms" in japan.

[David T Anderson]

My Aikido organization [Nakayamakai] doesn't grade or award ranks, nor do we wear belts for anything but to hold our gi jackets shut.

I can see the purpose in a rank and belt structure...sometimes I wonder if I'd like it better to have specific goals to work towards, and a visible distinction to show off as a reward for all my hard work. But then I think...my goal is to become a better Aikidoka and a better person...and that's a goal that's always a mile or two further away, however far I travel. As for a visible distinction... Why should I want to hold myself up as better than some of my dojo mates? And I know that the new guy I'm better than today may very well dump me on my duff tomorrow.

As it is, I wear a white Iai obi [from Bujin]. If I spend sufficient years in the dojo to wear it out, perhaps I won't feel foolish if I think about buying a black one...I have that much ego...

[Shizen]

Good posts, everybody! I never knew all that information about Kano.

re: "What are the good points and bad points in this system, when we think about it from the view of training and the ethics, which are brought to dojos with'em? Is it along the lines of budo-thinking, that we should keep beginners contesting from different colored belts? Also funny thought is that usually the highest ranked students are placed in front of the class, and beginners are in back. Is this kind of motivating necessary? On students view this is little bit awkward, cos it is possible, that beginners can't see clearly what the teacher is demonstrating.

Tell me your opinions, because I am interested to hear them. "

~ József Pap

Ok, here's my $0.02 (before taxes)

The good points are the motivational tool, the tool to compare eachother *within* the dojo. I have to stress "within" because I think outside the dojo, belts mean nothing. A blackbelt in karate cannot be compared to a blackbelt in judo. In large classes, like karate/taekwondo schools in big cities, all the different colors makes it easy to know if someone has more experience than someone else (based on the testing of technique). In the arts I study, everyone wears the same color belt - more or less - total newbies may wear white to let others know to play gently with them, and blackbelts wear black belts because they earned that right, and it lets others know that that person is qualified to answer questions (maybe not teach, but to act as a guide/example). The rest of us wear green. The class size is small enough that the greenbelts know who has a higher rank because of training experience. The point of knowing who is more experienced is when training together. If I train with someone with less experience, I will make sure that I ease up a little so I don't throw them harder than they have ukemi for. If I train with someone with more experience, then I know I can "play rough" with them and they can handle it.

The bad points: In some martial arts, the color of the belt is the measure of the man (or woman, I try to be PC sometimes). This can lead to ego-inflation as others mentioned, and can make earning rank seem like the goal to some people. This mentality should be discussed and dealt with by the sensei (unless of course the sensei is in business to sell belts, and that is his right as long as he is honest about it). I used to take Taekwondo, and of many things that I didn't like, I didn't like that there were soooooo many colors! Not only were there like 10 kyu ranks - each with a different color, but there were steps within each kyu and after each kyu, a stripe was added to the belt. Maybe this was for the kids who needed motivation and reward every couple days. I don't know, but it seemed ridiculous!

I believe that a well defined ranking structure is a good idea in groups like school, military, etc. It allows for chain of command, skill assesment, reward, etc. so I think as long as MA students don't get cought up in the bad aspects, then colored belts are fine.

I've heard this story from many sensei, and I don't know if it's true or not, but sounds reasonable: The origin of / inspiration for using colored belts as a way to determine someone's skill level within a dojo came from martial artists only having one white belt to use throughout training. The belt was not washed, so after years of use, it gradually became darker - yellowed from sweat, green from grass stains, brown from dirt, red from blood, and finally when none of the original white showed through, it looked black. If anyone can confirm the historical validity of this story, please do.

Something I've noticed in modern times is the belts worn by aged and wizened masters who have trained for many many years. They have had the same black belt for so long that it has frayed, faded and lost some of its color so that it starts to look white again. Since some martial arts masters speak of returning to innocence, regaining purity, leaving behind the technique and such - it seems poetic that their belt looks white again!

As for higher ranks in front / beginers in back: I think one reason may be along the same lines (no pun intended) of having students line up right to left in order of seniority. I have read the reason was that the teacher would be protected from harm comming from outside (the door usually being in the back and to the left of the dojo) by having a line of students in front of him. Also by having his best students closest to him in the front, the master would be protected. Another reason is that with this wall of students, it is harder for people looking in from outside to see what the instructor is doing, thus protecting his knowledge from those not paying for it / dedicating themselves to it / etc.
It is this same line of reasoning that puts the juniors behind the seniors. The seniors have shown more dedication so should be allowed to see more clearly what is being taught. They are trying to learn the more advanced & subtle aspects of the art and this is best accomplished by watching the teacher's demonstration closely. In the case of a crowded karate class. The juniors, while practicing their drills, can easily see the seniors in front of them to use as an example if they cannot see the head instructor clearly. In some dojo, the head instructor, or his assistant, or a senior student will walk around and help the juniors with fine points that may have been missed. All in all I find this system of lining people up to be very efficient and effective. I don't think it has much to do with motivation, like it will encourage the juniors to work harder so they can 'get to the head of the class' or just to earn a better view. I don't know if any student thinks like that while training. If they are, then as with the belt system, they should be corrected to not focus much on the 'pecking order' as it distracts from learning correct form in techniques.

I primarily practice Bujinkan budo, and the emphasis is always on trying our best to learn effective combat strategy while at the same time maintaining a friendly, family-like atmosphere. Fomalities exist but are few. We don't bow much during the actual training (we have the usual meditation and bowing to the kamiza and sensei before and after class), sometimes we don't even wear our uniforms or belts. Guys will wear tank tops and sweat pants if they feel more comfortable in it. I've seen women wearing fuzzy bedroom slippers during training, I've seen people borrow other people's belts (regardless of color) to wear if they didn't bring their own - usually this only happens if the belt is needed for a particular technique, esp. to hold the scabbard of a sword. We laugh and joke while beating the crap out of eachother and everyone has a good time. I don't even know what anybody else's rank is, I can tell if they know more or less than I do from watching them perform. Despite all this, there is no chaos. Classes run as smoothly as in any other dojo. I think the logic is that we are learning real fighting, so anything that simulates the real world can only help. We usually train outside (to introduce weather and terrain factors). If inside, there may be music playing. I think it is a good idea to get used to these distractions. Most fights don't happen on padded floors in an air-conditioned room while wearing a MA uniform.

I also practice aikido, and it is much more formal. Much bowing, much silent respect, always wear the correct uniform, but in my aikido dojo, there are only 2 belts : white or black. there are 5 white belt grades and 5 black belt grades. The particular grade is only for the instructor's benefit to help decide which techniques to show and which to save for later. I like being able to train in both styles.

I hope the points I made make sense to other MA'ists.


:wave:

[Nicolas Caron]

To answer about the student's position in the dojo I will quote from Andre Cannas page (hope he doesn't mind... here's the link to it : http://www3.sympatico.ca/apc/home.htm)

"The highest ranking students take place on the right, facing the teacher who has his back to the kamiza. The beginners are placed on the left or on a second row behind the oldest practitioners. Each person sits at a place determined by the hierarchy of ranks. This placing is not without reason. In the event of a surprise attack, it is much more difficult to draw the sword while facing left than right. The older students are known to the teacher and have his complete trust. On the other hand, the teacher is less familiar with the new students standing on his right. Accordingly, his position allows him to repel any treacherous attack much more easily. It is not an expression of excessive suspicion, but rather of normal vigilance."

[red_fists]

Hi.

Here is another mixed viewpoint.

My Art is bassically chinese, but I study under a Japanese Teacher with some "Japanese" habits in the style.

1.) We don't have any outwardly signs of rank or level. Not even Uniforms.
2.) We are split into groups according to the material that we train.
3.) We have some "Skill exhibition", and are given Certificates after performing them. Nobody fails, but than the reasons for that take a long time to exlain.
4.) Seniority in the System is bassically non-existant, BUT we put Beginners into the middle of the Group so that they always got a more skilled Person in front of them during Forms/Kata execution. We do a lot of direction changes.5.) We do follow the Japanese rules for bowing.
6.) Most students admit that if it weren't for the "Certificates" & "Skill Exhibitions" they would have stopped long ago.

Perosnally, I prefer the less structured/non-belted Chinese styles, as I don't see what the structure has to do with MA Skill.

Just some ramblings.

[Markaso]

Here is something more on belts to talk about. Hash marks for the level of black belt, for example 1 for Shodan 2 for Nidan and so on. I've been to some dojos in the States where this was well displayed and the norm.
I have only seen very few Karatekas in Japan, who also were Japanese, also have the hash marks. Any thoughts?? Also where did this start. In my Dojo or should I say where I practice I have not seen this at all. I have only seen this a couple of times in Japan.

[mawashiman]

our (veeery few) black belt students do not display any hash marks, just a plain black belt. Personally i like it that way, it isnt flashy (not criticising those black belts with hash marks, in tkd that i studied they were present) and its simple.

I do not like excessive attention on belts, in my small dojo, all students know where each other student stands skill and rank wise. Personally, id be quite happy with simply traditional shoden/chuden/okuden etc certification. but it is upto the teacher i spose. although in arts requiring a hakama, belt is irrelevant, so the point is wasted on say iaido for example. :p (hehehe get it? point? iaido? geez i crack ymself up sometimes.)

do what is considerd normal within your dojo or art, but i see no need in making a fuss or a point over it in class.

back to wasting time late at night..

*wraps rather bright orange belt around dogi* :smokin:

chaaaaarge!

regards.

[Markaso]

Mr. George - In my TKD Dojo in the States the black belts all had hash marks. I did not get that high in the ranking so I had nothing to worry about. Yea I agree just a plain black belt is okay with me. as a matter of fact a white one is just fine too. As you said everyone knows where you are in a Dojo............... I must admit though, it sure was a nice feeling to be awarded my Shodan a way back when.

[mawashiman]

I know that it'll be a very proud day when im awarded Shodan (if/when :) ) And I think i couldnt be any more happy to wear a hard earned black belt. (i know its just a belt still..)
But i think the issue at hand is the ranking system, and way to recognise rank within your school (or way if you prefer) . Now its easy to criticise others based on their ranking system. The important thing is the rank within a school or system which means the most to you, and ultimately what it means to you.

Ill be proud of any promotion i receive in my school, as im sure everyone else will. :toast: While your belt or grade whatever mightnt mean much to others, that doesnt matter, its not sposed to matter to strangers. at least i dont think so, it matters within the school which you train in and the personal gratification and pride you get for the amount of work and sweat you have put in to earn. Whether it is a sash, a certificate, a belt or bright neo head band. it's its significance to you that counts. While physically, the material might mean much, its what it stands for..

late night musings.. monday morning very soon. :cry:

and Markaso (i cant see your full name from here im sorry) congratulations, even though its probably years ago. :smash:

Regards,

Paris.

ps. the secret of happiness is getting enough sleep a night..

[Markaso]

Mr. George - Not to get religious but AMEN to sleep. Could not so I am up at 3:00 am On Monday morning. Some points well said about the ranking.


Yes ranking varies from school to school. But if someone knows you are studying a MA then they too are impressed with the the rank of black belt and above. But that is another story.


I think rank can be a great motivational tool for a school or a teacher but to charge up the ying yang and promise certain level just because you paid the school a lot of money is not a good ranking system! Actually it belittles that school and teacher to no end! As for ranks. mmmmmmm or putting them on display I think as said before. Everyone there knows where you are especially the teacher. The real rank is within

Yep it was years ago but thanks for the congrats!:)

[MarkF]

Originally posted by Jeff Hamacher
bear in mind, however, that, if i follow your logic precisely, Kano-sensei adopted a kyu-dan structure in his ranking so that it might appeal to potential students outside of japan based on his own perception of western ideas. whether or not his perception was accurate becomes the heart of the matter. i heard an italian student of martial arts (kyudo in particular) speak at a seminar a few years back. he argued that the "sportification" of japanese martial arts was not the fault of "outside pressures" but rather the choice of japanese teachers who believed that, unless their structure was modified, the arts wouldn't appeal to foreigners. was the coloured belt system created by japanese martial arts teachers based on false assumptions about foreign societies? that's something i'd like to know more about.


Originally posted by Joseph Svinth
Kano was at the Peer's Academy, not some YMCA in Osaka. Thus the proper form of address would have been a matter of considerable import to these young men (and their teachers, who doubtless wanted to stay employed). So, provide people ranking by the comparatively egalitarian white and black belt, and lo! Instantly and at a glance, one knows which forms of address to use, and thus can easily move along to dialogue such as "How the devil did you do that?" or "Sir, would you work with me?"

Gosh, I wonder how I managed to avoid another discussion on belt ranking.:rolleyes:

I realize that Jeff is using someone else's logic in this particular reasoning for having a kyu-dan system of ranking the people, martial artists, if you will, and would normally have a small problem in the explanation. Joe's statement with the cynical and sarcastic reason for having it for such a simple reason, is probably more correctly stated than most offer.

While the dan grading certificates were first issued by Kano has so many reasons for it, I couldn't list them all for fear of writing on the style sheet and then be horribly slighted by the Internet and lose my connection, thus losing the words.

But the general, most important reasons for it I can state, at least as I understand them.

Jigoro Kano issued sho dan grades to his beginning students, before the entrance of the judogi where an obi would be necessary to keep the uwagi closed. His students then were truly beginners, or "first step" students. He did not found a kyu system, and even when it became necessary to differentiate the mudan from the yudan, there was, as far as I can find, still no kyu grades. There isn't much information specific to this, so I do believe it probably was eventually done to again divide mudan from each other, but still without colored belts, at least no more than a white belt and a black one. Reasons for this are simple enough, there were a lot more people being trained and more dojo where they trained. There comes Joe's most probable reasons for them. It goes into not needing to make out scrolls, and other more difficult and dangerous reasons, the then current way of the jujutsu schools. It wasn't seen as a good manner of upbringing then.

The white and black may even have come from the fact that Kano usually wore hakama after he withdrew physical participation in the dojo and stuck strictly with teaching. His hakama (and kimono) were black, so black for those who mastered the basics can be taken from this. It may or may not be true but it is just as fine a reason compared to anything else. In old film, Kano can be seen teaching students, some in white belts others in black. There didn't seem to be any other color until judo and Kano moved to spread judo to other nations, so it can be said that the brown belt was either created in the first western dojo, even here in the US. There isn't much on that in the way of positive proof so it is layed at whomever is able to make the most reasonable statement based on the history of it.

After the brown belt became fairly normal procedure, it seems that Europe than exported the multicolored belts, particularly from France, to the US and Canada sometime in the 1950s.

Without going into more detail, I believe it probably did begin in the West but Japan was not all that far behind in the use of colors when a student graduated to the next level. They lapped it up just as they did in other countries. Other than age and place in society, it brought money into the dojo. No real or universal test was ever designed to move students up the ladder, it was usually something done by the teachers, and did so differently from dojo to dojo, but generally, the same grades, but at a slower pace in the West. Rankings observed while in Japan, age and status very much did decide when it would be done. In the US even today, they are much slower to promote than in Japan, as a new student at adult age could climb the ladder very quickly again depending on age. Some had status at work, and that too played over into the dojo.

Today, it isn't all that unusual for one to graduate to shodan in six months or even less, and other MA than judo do so at an even quicker pace. One woman I know was graduated to shodan at the school she entered, mainly to be able to do something her kids were doing, as a family, and at about four months after beginning her training in judo she was told she would be getting her shodan in a couple of weeks. She complained she only knew four nage-waza well, and perhaps two pins, and nothing else, but again as she was in her thirties, she was older than some of the instructors.

But there is another consideration, too. Most judo people are not refered to as judoka in Japan until fourth or fifth dan, and instead are called judoshugyosha.
*****

There is, it seems, a hierarchal reason behind grading, but not the same manner in the West. Here, it is strictly your rank in the dojo, but in my experience, students are generally taught to line up according to grade while yudansha take a position in the same way next to the teacher (left side when facing the class) who is standing opposite to the students.

This last area, is probably the lone hold-over from the "olden days" of the 1960s, when I began training. It took no time to graduate through the kyu grades, though I don't remember it being of such importance except when changing dojo, they did want to know then, but it was never so important that the mudan were split up more than brown belt (ikyu) from the rest of the mudan, but getting to sho dan from ikyu took years and years. It was also necessary to the Judo organization I belonged to. After the middle sixties, they wanted a specific rank to put on the newer, credit card-like ID cards. It was important between the black and basically white belts, but I never heard anyone being told they held anything but a different color belt untill sankyu.

All below sankyu wore white belts during shiai, the decision as to whom you would fight was made generally by height and when it was your turn on the line-up card. You never knew the opponent untill you were called and who was the winner of the prior match, or if a draw, another fresh student would be facing you.

As mixed up as it was, it was all in relative good fun. At shodan, that kind of fun changed as did responsabilities.

Mark

[mawashiman]

Mark - Very well said about the rank within! :toast:
And please, no need for formality, first name is fine! :)

Agreed, your friends who know you practice can also appreciate your rank. Those who study MA as well appreciate on a higher level, I have a friend who has studied hapkido for quite a few years now and the great thing is to be able to discuss both our arts with great interest, and rank is one issue which never comes up, its great there exists no rivalry between us. However, I suspect that this is a good case almost, as i have other friends who tend to boast and be arrogant :nono:

Furthermore on what you said, belts do provide great motivation. I personally have seen a school where rank was provided as long you paid, you pay you pass. Thats very sad, as youll see plenty of real sloppy technique, and it does the students no good at all, the only tihng i could hope for is students under such a school gain a lifelong interest in MA, which is fantastic.

Anyway, I dont really think im adding much to this discussion hehe. so im going to trot off to sleep fellas.

Kind Regards,

[Markaso]

Mr. George - Sorry about being so formal but I was always taught to respect and treat others well, of course unless they do something to earn disrespect. Do not know you well enough not to respect you.:)

[Markaso]

In my Dojo in Kyoto the children were given different colored belts but for the adults they were given just white,brown,black.

Now, in my Dojo in Kyushu, everyone runs through the colored belts of white, yellow,green,purple,brown,then black. Of course the Adult black belts have a different meaning than the childrens black belt.

[Boris Arsoyev]

Seating closer to a teacher is a black belt person of superior rank in dojo, teacher is always making sure that no one is left out, even the newest white belt is seating right next to a teacher when dojo is full. As for myself I've been seating in the midle of a class for a wile and I always pay attention when my teacher is demonstrating to whole class yep sometimes I had to look over peoples heads and shoulders to see clearly. :)Good luck