Rules for main forums
- Be nice
- No advertisement
- No events
- No fundraisers
- No topics asking for votes
- Only posts related to Brazilian Jiu Jitsu
Don’t let this happen to BJJ...
6 year(s) ago • 656 views • 11 replies
JMBlack belt 1st degreeVerified
6 year(s) ago
While I’m not a Black Belt in BJJ, I am a 30 year practitioner and 5th Degree Black Belt in Taekwondo, with a Brown Belt in BJJ. I am also a finance minded individual having a professional background of over 20 years in revenue management.
I’ll be speaking from the totality of this experience...
Traditionally, a relationship is created between a student and instructor, and a promotion is granted based on knowledge of that student by that instructor. Accordingly, the decision of rank becomes a reflection on the instructor (a tree shall be known by its fruit).
Traditional Asian Arts (that use a belt system) started this way, to the extent that a students performance of a kata/hyung could often identify his instructor or lineage. Additionally, instructors would be very reserved in granting promotions as their name would forever be connected to the student.
Once organizations became the norm, the standards quickly diminished as financial gain was introduced to the equation. Additionally, students were groomed to view the organizational hierarchy as the authority rather than the instructor himself. Thus the pyramid scheme was born.
As a gym owner, I understand the importance of revenue generation for payroll and the operational budget. As one who has directed tournaments and competitions, I understand the costs associated with hosting a quality event.
Accordingly, I feel Belt promotions and revenue should be kept as far separated as possible, and never allowed to co-mingle. If your operating structure allows for rank to become a revenue stream, it may become too tempting to promote a student who is “pretty close” if money gets tight. Ultimately creating the trickle of bad decisions.
Finally, I wish Athletic Associations would be recognized as such, rather than being granted the perception as “ultimate authority” over a martial arts system.
And to those hoping to see BJJ in the Olympics...imagine how much worse the plague will become. If you’re not familiar with the issues this presents, I’ll be happy to elaborate!
Share your thoughts and opinions with me, I look forward to learning your views and opinions.
I’ll be speaking from the totality of this experience...
Traditionally, a relationship is created between a student and instructor, and a promotion is granted based on knowledge of that student by that instructor. Accordingly, the decision of rank becomes a reflection on the instructor (a tree shall be known by its fruit).
Traditional Asian Arts (that use a belt system) started this way, to the extent that a students performance of a kata/hyung could often identify his instructor or lineage. Additionally, instructors would be very reserved in granting promotions as their name would forever be connected to the student.
Once organizations became the norm, the standards quickly diminished as financial gain was introduced to the equation. Additionally, students were groomed to view the organizational hierarchy as the authority rather than the instructor himself. Thus the pyramid scheme was born.
As a gym owner, I understand the importance of revenue generation for payroll and the operational budget. As one who has directed tournaments and competitions, I understand the costs associated with hosting a quality event.
Accordingly, I feel Belt promotions and revenue should be kept as far separated as possible, and never allowed to co-mingle. If your operating structure allows for rank to become a revenue stream, it may become too tempting to promote a student who is “pretty close” if money gets tight. Ultimately creating the trickle of bad decisions.
Finally, I wish Athletic Associations would be recognized as such, rather than being granted the perception as “ultimate authority” over a martial arts system.
And to those hoping to see BJJ in the Olympics...imagine how much worse the plague will become. If you’re not familiar with the issues this presents, I’ll be happy to elaborate!
Share your thoughts and opinions with me, I look forward to learning your views and opinions.
Edited 6 year(s) ago
JMBlack belt 2nd degreeVerified
6 year(s) ago
Judo seems to be doing pretty well doesn't it? (yes they have their rule changes and politics but seems they've recovered from that by now)
Don't know much about how TKD is organized but isn't the "TKD belt" kind of a running joke by now as often revenue and gradings are connected for kids? (Don't get me wrong, TKD athletes I know are tough ppl by all accounts and TKD arsenal defo has it's place in MMA & striking arts training)
Don't know much about how TKD is organized but isn't the "TKD belt" kind of a running joke by now as often revenue and gradings are connected for kids? (Don't get me wrong, TKD athletes I know are tough ppl by all accounts and TKD arsenal defo has it's place in MMA & striking arts training)
JMBlack belt 1st degreeVerified
6 year(s) ago
Thank you for the reply, and please know I’m not at all sensitive about the issues plaguing TKD. Honestly, I left TKD for MMA and BJJ because of these stereotypical, yet overwhelmingly accurate perceptions.
Judo has failed fairly well from my limited knowledge, and I’m interested if anyone here with more experience on the topic would care to chime explain. How has Judo been affected, either by political structure or Olympic inclusion...or alternately, how has it retained its validity when so many other arts gave not?
Judo has failed fairly well from my limited knowledge, and I’m interested if anyone here with more experience on the topic would care to chime explain. How has Judo been affected, either by political structure or Olympic inclusion...or alternately, how has it retained its validity when so many other arts gave not?
DBBlack beltVerified
6 year(s) ago
Olympic inclusion has caused the rules of judo as a sport to shift. Most clubs end up following suit and training to the new rules. Lower (kyu and early dan) ranks are generally done off of knowledge of the 40 throws of the gokyo, demonstration of kata, and subjective assessment of randori/shiai. So the two are a bit divorced. If you do well in competitions you'll rank up faster, but only to a point anyway and you'll generally still need to know Nage No Kata. A given instructor can only award rank up to a certain point and it still generally goes through a promotion board to approve it. Your instructor is really recommending you for a rank if anything.
To add, no one really cares about the kyu ranks. If someone wanted to sell you a yonkyu rank for being close, it would be a bit like selling you another stripe on a white belt in BJJ to be honest.
To add, no one really cares about the kyu ranks. If someone wanted to sell you a yonkyu rank for being close, it would be a bit like selling you another stripe on a white belt in BJJ to be honest.
MEPurple beltVerified
6 year(s) ago
Why do people blame Olympic inclusion for the rule shifts in Judo? Judo was an Olympic sport long before many of those rule shifts started. Also, part of Olympic inclusion is having a non-profit democratic ruling body. IJF for Judo, UWW for Wrestling and BJJ(to date).
It is coaches that are electing those rule committees that make those changes. It isnt coming down from the IOC.
It is coaches that are electing those rule committees that make those changes. It isnt coming down from the IOC.
DBBlack beltVerified
6 year(s) ago
1. Folks like Neil Adams have confirmed rule changes like leg grabs have been in response to requests from the IOC. (https://www.spreaker.com/[...]ection-one)
2. Judo's rule changes are generally targeted toward making it a friendlier sport to televise based on my discussions with National and International level referees. This is largely done to keep judo popular enough to retain Olympic status.
While the community has to accept the rules changes, they do so with the intention of keeping the sport relevant and with feedback from the IOC.
Edit: updated with an even newer interview where Adams discussed leg grabs and IOC
2. Judo's rule changes are generally targeted toward making it a friendlier sport to televise based on my discussions with National and International level referees. This is largely done to keep judo popular enough to retain Olympic status.
While the community has to accept the rules changes, they do so with the intention of keeping the sport relevant and with feedback from the IOC.
Edit: updated with an even newer interview where Adams discussed leg grabs and IOC
Edited 6 year(s) ago
ALBlack belt 1st degreeVerified
6 year(s) ago
Accordingly, I feel Belt promotions and revenue should be kept as far separated as possible, and never allowed to co-mingle. If your operating structure allows for rank to become a revenue stream, it may become too tempting to promote a student who is “pretty close” if money gets tight. Ultimately creating the trickle of bad decisions.
I agree wholeheartedly with this.
I charge all my students an annual registration fee (that covers association dues for my school), and monthly tuition. Belts - when awarded - are paid for from that. No promotion fees, no testing fees, etc, unless someone were to want a private lesson for "evaluation" in which case they would simply be charged my standard private lesson rate. No more, no less.
I charge all my students an annual registration fee (that covers association dues for my school), and monthly tuition. Belts - when awarded - are paid for from that. No promotion fees, no testing fees, etc, unless someone were to want a private lesson for "evaluation" in which case they would simply be charged my standard private lesson rate. No more, no less.
JMBlack belt 1st degreeVerified
6 year(s) ago
1. Folks like Neil Adams have confirmed rule changes like leg grabs have been in response to requests from the IOC. (https://www.spreaker.com/[...]ection-one) 2. Judo's rule changes are generally targeted toward making it a friendlier sport to televise based on my discussions with National and International level referees. This is largely done to keep judo popular enough to retain Olympic status. While the community has to accept the rules changes, they do so with the intention of keeping the sport relevant and with feedback from the IOC. Edit: updated with an even newer interview where Adams discussed leg grabs and IOC
These are just the type of things that occurred in Taekwondo, and IMO where the art starts to dilute. When the IOC declares a specific organization as the governing body, then association with that governing body becomes viewed as a seal of legitimacy to the free world. Accordingly, it becomes a marketing tool, and in time the sporting style becomes the focus. As the rules of the sport are narrowed, so too does the average scope of training narrow.
In Taekwondo it was the removal of punching to the head, then the lack of scoring for punching to the chest protector, and finally the removal of the necessity for "trembling shock" as a requirement for a blow to score. I would speculate the next generation of Judoka will see a severely diminished percentage of practitioner who have live training against leg grab throws...yes it is in the curriculum, but how much emphasis will be lost due to the focus on the IOC rules as opposed to the totality of the system.
It may be unfounded, but I watched the 30 year digression of TKD, and would hate to see the same occur elsewhere.
In Taekwondo it was the removal of punching to the head, then the lack of scoring for punching to the chest protector, and finally the removal of the necessity for "trembling shock" as a requirement for a blow to score. I would speculate the next generation of Judoka will see a severely diminished percentage of practitioner who have live training against leg grab throws...yes it is in the curriculum, but how much emphasis will be lost due to the focus on the IOC rules as opposed to the totality of the system.
It may be unfounded, but I watched the 30 year digression of TKD, and would hate to see the same occur elsewhere.
MEPurple beltVerified
6 year(s) ago
I still have yet to see proof that the removal of leg attacks came down from the IOC. There seems to be a lot of people wanting to claim that because they don't want to admit that their democratically elected governing body has chosen to make those rule changes.
DBBlack beltVerified
6 year(s) ago
@Michael, if you don't believe Neil Adams' statements constitute that it was done to sate the IOC, then I don't know what to tell you. The official reason we were told in referees meetings was they were removed to prevent stalling that was happening from shot attempts that were never going to be finished for points. There's not going to be an official statement by the IJF throwing the IOC under the bus for a rule change that is disliked due to perception rather than impact.
I heard the rumor from National and International referees, then Neil Adams talked about it too. You're free to simply believe the official reasoning, but given the changes that UWW did after Greco was threatened with removal around 2008, that still doesn't change that Olympic inclusion almost always means rule changes of some form over time for combat sports.
I heard the rumor from National and International referees, then Neil Adams talked about it too. You're free to simply believe the official reasoning, but given the changes that UWW did after Greco was threatened with removal around 2008, that still doesn't change that Olympic inclusion almost always means rule changes of some form over time for combat sports.
DBBlack beltVerified
6 year(s) ago
Actually, while I remember the 2008 talk, it looks like that IOC pressure on wrestling started before I even began grappling - as early as 2002:
https://www.teamusa.org/U[...]nick--5673
https://www.google.com/ur[...]b7JGARDIFQ
https://www.teamusa.org/U[...]nick--5673
https://www.google.com/ur[...]b7JGARDIFQ
MEPurple beltVerified
6 year(s) ago
There wasn't pressure to change wrestling they were simply considering dropping it from the games, which they did do.
USAWrestling and UWW hit back by opening a women's division and making wrestling, which was waning in popularity then, much more popular internationally. However, pressure as far as you were speaking simply didnt exist.
Believe what you will but I've been involved in grappling since 1983. Most rule changes in my experience come from the bottom up. I suggest you talk to Mark Tripp about the IJF rules. He has a very different take and he was there when it happened.
USAWrestling and UWW hit back by opening a women's division and making wrestling, which was waning in popularity then, much more popular internationally. However, pressure as far as you were speaking simply didnt exist.
Believe what you will but I've been involved in grappling since 1983. Most rule changes in my experience come from the bottom up. I suggest you talk to Mark Tripp about the IJF rules. He has a very different take and he was there when it happened.
