Are you tough enough to wear that black belt?

[Bill Glasheen]

The one thing that worries me is the cult like behavior during the test, but that may just be the editing.

Good point, Mike. This was an issue with the teacher I mentioned above. It's a reason I and other top students stopped affiliating ourselves with him. And that's a shame. He was good.

And if all was gleaned and developed before the test then isn't the test itself nothing more than a formality and of no real purpose?

Another excellent point, Mike.

Testing DOES serve a vital function. One of the major differences between a gymnasium fighter and a warrior is the ability to perform under the Survival Stress Reflex. (Right, Van?) We can't create life-threatening stress in the dojo without inviting assault. But tests and competition do provide at least a moderate amount of stress so that the test board can see the degree to which psychological responses and complex motor coordination are affected.

The students must have a very real possibility of failing the test - no matter how good they perform in regular class. Otherwise there's no point in the test. Furthermore, there's little to no ability to assess whether or not the person will be able to perform outside the comfortable confines of personal instruction.

- Bill

[Bill Glasheen]

breaking the test into multiple days.

Been there, done that. At UVa where I had large classes, the test was broken up into a mid-term and a final. All exercises and prearranged partner work were done on the midterm. Kata, sparring, and a lengthy written test were done on the final. The circular nature of the instruction from semester to semester worked out pretty well.

- Bill

[miked]

[quote="MikeK"]Bows back in...
One last thing. Did you contact the schools owner before using him as your example.

http://canadasbestkarate.com/index.php

Bows back out...

[quote="miked"]http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-1765 ... black-belt
---------------------------------------------------------

Mike K,

I did not contact the owner of the school as the video content is now in the public domain.

If the school owner does not want the media in the public domain and available for public comment then it is his/her responsibility to contact YouTube and/or the poster and demand that the media be removed from the public domain.

Regards,

Mike DeDonato
Los Angeles, CA
mjdcgb@ca.rr.com
www.uechi-la.org

[miked]

" quote: Originally posted by MikeK

And if all was gleaned and developed before the test then isn't the test itself nothing more than a formality and of no real purpose?


Another excellent point, Mike.

Testing DOES serve a vital function. One of the major differences between a gymnasium fighter and a warrior is the ability to perform under the Survival Stress Reflex. (Right, Van?) We can't create life-threatening stress in the dojo without inviting assault. But tests and competition do provide at least a moderate amount of stress so that the test board can see the degree to which psychological responses and complex motor coordination are affected.

The students must have a very real possibility of failing the test - no matter how good they perform in regular class. Otherwise there's no point in the test. Furthermore, there's little to no ability to assess whether or not the person will be able to perform outside the comfortable confines of personal instruction."
------------------------------------------------------

I am in agreement with many of my instructors who have reiterated that the test should be a formality as the stress, pressures, challenges and expectations should have been met and exceeded in the dojo, long before the testing date.

If a student can't meet the expectation during routine practice then why would anyone think that student would pass on test day? This logic just does not make sense.

My argument is that no student should be put up to test unless the instructor is fully confident that the student will pass. To do otherwise is to set up a student for failure or embarrassment. Why would an instructor wish to embarrass or humiliate his/her own student?

The test should not be the equivalent of a guessing game as to "will he/she pass". That, in my opinion, is an unprofessional approach that ultimately shows a disrespect for the candidate, testing forum and the test board.

The testing should be a validation of the student's performance and his/her instructor's judgment. If an instructor has bad judgment about a student then it is up to the the board to straighten out the instructor.

Regards,

Mike DeDonato
www.uechi-la.org
mjdcgb@ca.rr.com

[Bill Glasheen]

Hmm... We'll have to agree to disagree here.

I am in agreement with many of my instructors who have reiterated that the test should be a formality as the stress, pressures, challenges and expectations should have been met and exceeded in the dojo, long before the testing date.

Then you should never have me on your test board because the service I perform as a judge is not to rubber-stamp the teacher's decision. Furthermore, my students know that I will not be on their black belt test board. When it comes to a dan rank, they must get independent validation. Otherwise the value of what I teach does not transfer.

If a student can't meet the expectation during routine practice then why would anyone think that student would pass on test day? This logic just does not make sense.

You've got it backwards, Mike.

The comfortable confines of your dojo is relatively stress free. Even when the instructor tries to create stressful situations, it's still "home." Meanwhile what we are doing is a MARTIAL art. By definition you will be performing what you learned under circumstances that your opponent or opponents would want to be non-ideal. The extra level of stress degrades all the body systems (vision, hearing, time perception) and physical skill (fine motor cooordination, complex motor coordination, etc.).

Let me give a simple example. Boston Red Sox are 51-24 at home, and 34-37 on the road. The Red Sox are pretty much assured of making the playoffs. But it's clear that their athletic skills don't transfer as well to the road as they show at home. You might think your team is good enough to win by viewing their performance at home. But they must also do well on someone else's home turf.

My argument is that no student should be put up to test unless the instructor is fully confident that the student will pass.

What is your definition of "fully confident?" If that means "expect" then I disagree. Do you think I expect even the best fighter always to succeed in a self-defense encounter? Sorry, but we can't control life that well.

Do some do better than others? Absolutely. Is anyone guaranteed? Only a fool would think so.

The fact that only 5 percent of the people who walk in the front door of my dojo get an invitation to a dan test shows that the home process is demanding. I will never give someone the OPPORTUNITY to stand in front of a dan test board unless they deserve it. But once I send a student to an INDEPENDENT test board, I would never presume to expect that test board do anything but judge what they see that day based upon their own professional opinions. If my student does great in the dojo but messes up in front of this independent panel, oh well... That's life. There are no mulligans in a fight.

Guess what, Mike? My highest ranking student (7th dan) failed his shodan exam. I can count my failed dan candidates on one hand. But a failure isn't necessarily a bad thing. How would YOU perform in front of a board that included Art Rabesa, Van Canna, Jim Malone, George Mattson, and a few others like them? Don't you think there's a chance you might have a bad day? And should we pass you if you do? I wouldn't let someone pass my student if they had a meltdown. To me that shows something (which I would work on) that wasn't apparent in a comfortable setting. And when it comes to a MARTIAL discipline, that's an important thing to uncover.

To do otherwise is to set up a student for failure or embarrassment. Why would an instructor wish to embarrass or humiliate his/her own student?

A failure is a man who has blundered but is not capable of cashing in on the experience. - Elbert Hubbard

I've missed more than 9,000 shots in my career. I've lost almost 300 games. 26 times I've been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over and over again in my life and that is why I succeed. - Michael Jordan

Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly. - Robert Kennedy

Is your black belt worth anything? - Mike DeDonato

- Bill

[mhosea]

I agree with that there is added stress in the examination context and that this is a valuable learning experience as well as a way of bringing out hidden weaknesses.

OTOH, I do recall Tomoyose sensei describing the way one used to become a black belt in Uechi Ryu. Something like, "Tomorrow you can wear a black belt to class."

[Bill Glasheen]

I do recall Tomoyose sensei describing the way one used to become a black belt in Uechi Ryu. Something like, "Tomorrow you can wear a black belt to class."

Yep... I lived some of those days.

In Tommy's day (and when I started), they didn't wear protective sparring equipment, didn't need special insurance to operate a dojo, would occasionally be involved in dojo battles, etc., etc. And when he started, they didn't even do belts, except maybe to hold their pants up. The karate ranking system is a very recent phenomenon, as are many of the karate style requirements (5 of the 8 Uechi kata, prearranged kumite, hojoundo, etc.).

Tommy would just as soon see them go back to three kata, conditioning, and fighting. Note that I did NOT say sparring. Listen to Shinyu Gushi and others of his generation talk about the old days of fighting, jiyu kobo, etc.

Then of course when I started, I walked an hour to my karate lessons. Uphill. In both directions!





- Bill

[Van Canna]

Testing DOES serve a vital function. One of the major differences between a gymnasium fighter and a warrior is the ability to perform under the Survival Stress Reflex. (Right, Van?)
- Bill

This will always be true when talking and defining martial arts as

Martial arts or fighting arts are systems of codified practices and traditions of training for combat. While they may be studied for various reasons, martial arts share a single objective: to physically defeat other persons and to defend oneself or others from physical threat.

This would be the ‘jutsu’ aspect…but as you know, Bill…the ‘Do’ is what is mostly being bandied about today in dojo… and ‘jutsu’ believers/practitioners are seen as 2nd class citizens. Very convenient.

A big problem we find is in the newly promoted black belt …who once he gets home after the hullabaloo… gets in a pensive mode about his abilities to defend himself against those big bad boys he met at the mall on the way home.

The comfortable confines of your dojo is relatively stress free. Even when the instructor tries to create stressful situations, it's still "home." Meanwhile what we are doing is a MARTIAL art. By definition you will be performing what you learned under circumstances that your opponent or opponents would want to be non-ideal. The extra level of stress degrades all the body systems (vision, hearing, time perception) and physical skill (fine motor coordination, complex motor coordination, etc.).

Very true…there must be some way to ‘adrenalize’ the situation for the candidate, something he first needs to understand…then surmount during the test…and this is the bare minimum…to go home with a modicum of self credibility.

Let me give a simple example. Boston Red Sox are 51-24 at home, and 34-37 on the road. The Red Sox are pretty much assured of making the playoffs. But it's clear that their athletic skills don't transfer as well to the road as they show at home. You might think your team is good enough to win by viewing their performance at home. But they must also do well on someone else's home turf.

This is correct and the bane of soccer players…among others…playing in the field of the opposing team...brings on much stress and uncertainties, especially under the constant insults and other psychological misdeeds of the spectators.

And true, at the time of the ‘wear your black belt tomorrow in class’ days…students trained differently as a whole…lots of sparring against other styles, tournaments, some dojo challenges…etc., today we see many students who are afraid to even spar on the floor.

One good stress event would be to get on the floor during a Dan test with a Jim Witherell…firing rifle shots kicks at you as he does.

That is stress.

[mhosea]

Then of course when I started, I walked an hour to my karate lessons. Uphill. In both directions!

Living on the plains and lowlands, as I had for most of my life, I always thought this "uphill in both directions" saying was just a humorous way of poking fun at the exaggerated recollections of the elderly. But I have to say, as I cycle to work in Massachusetts now, it actually is uphill both ways.

[Van Canna]

This is a typical bike parking lot in Medieval Ferrara, Italy...

[miked]

Bill wrote:


"Then you should never have me on your test board because the service I perform as a judge is not to rubber-stamp the teacher's decision."

We are in agreement, no board should "rubber stamp" a candidate. On the other hand the candidate should not have been put up for testing if the instructor was not "reasonably" confident that the candidate would pass.
-------------------------------------------------------
I wrote:

"If a student can't meet the expectation during routine practice then why would anyone think that student would pass on test day? This logic just does not make sense.

Bill replied: You've got it backwards, Mike."

Sorry Bill, my statement still stands. There is no reasonable explanation that I can discern as to why an instructor would put up a student if the instructor didn't expect the student to pass.
------------------------------------------------------

Bill wrote: "What is your definition of "fully confident?" If that means "expect" then I disagree. Do you think I expect even the best fighter always to succeed in a self-defense encounter?"


The answer to the second question is NO.

As to the first question, let me rephrase. I believe that no candidate should be put up for testing for a dan rank unless the instructor has reasonable confidence or expectation that the candidate will pass. If you want to pick up apart the word "reasonable", that is fine, we could go on arguing semantics until the "cows come home". Obviously, nothing is 100% guaranteed (except death and taxes).
----------------------------------------------------------
Bill wrote:
" I will never give someone the OPPORTUNITY to stand in front of a dan test board unless they deserve it."


Well, there you made my point. You would not choose to deliberately put someone up to test unless you were "confident" about their abilities to withstand the process.
----------------------------------------------------------

Bill wrote: "But once I send a student to an INDEPENDENT test board, I would never presume to expect that test board do anything but judge what they see that day based upon their own professional opinions."


Agreed. We all have good days and bad days. Should an otherwise qualified candidate who has diligently trained to hone skills, proper mindset and spirit be failed for a miscue or two? I don't think so, but perhaps there are many that may feel differently. It appears to me that the candidate's performance taken as a whole should be considered before passing judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------
" How would YOU perform in front of a board that included Art Rabesa, Van Canna, Jim Malone, George Mattson, and a few others like them? "
--------------------------------------------------------
I passed my second dan with the majority of the names you have listed in this question sitting on the board.

I passed my Yondan in front of the full Okikukai board of Okinawan seniors at the hombu in Naha.

Could I have had a bad day on either of these occasions? Of course, as could anyone.

Should I or anyone be passed on a bad day?

Well, I guess it all depends. Do you take into consideration other factors (i.e. contribution to the art, etc.). Is the candidate consistently failing to make the standard during the pre-test workouts and such? What if the candidate had proven themselves over and over again in class, in competition, at seminars, demonstrations, etc. Obviously, I am talking abut serious candidates who have spent years dedicated to training, teaching and working the art. These are the exceptions. If "run of the mill" candidates have bad days, I will continue to fail them.

---------------------------------------------------------
"quote: Originally posted by miked

To do otherwise is to set up a student for failure or embarrassment. Why would an instructor wish to embarrass or humiliate his/her own student? "

Bill's reply

A failure is a man who has blundered but is not capable of cashing in on the experience. - Elbert Hubbard

I've missed more than 9,000 shots in my career. I've lost almost 300 games. 26 times I've been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over and over again in my life and that is why I succeed. - Michael Jordan

Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly. - Robert Kennedy"
-------------------------------------------------------

Some great quotes but your reply doesn't answer the question. Risk takers are all around us (especially those serving in the military). These individuals chose to take the risks. Hopefully, they are not set up to fail by their commanders, coaches, mentors, managers, instructors or seniors. I suspect that Michael Jordan would not have started if his coaches were not reasonably confident that he would be bring significant advantages to the overall team effort. Would Robert Kennedy have run for President if his handlers didn't feel that he was electable? (I do understand that some politicians run on principle or to make a point and that is a discussion left for another day.)

----------------------------------------------------



Regards,

Mike DeDonato
www.uechi-la.org
mjdcgb@ca.rr.com

[Van Canna]

MikeD

Agreed. We all have good days and bad days. Should an otherwise qualified candidate who has diligently trained to hone skills, proper mindset and spirit be failed for a miscue or two? I don't think so, but perhaps there are many that may feel differently. It appears to me that the candidate's performance taken as a whole should be considered before passing judgment.

MikeD

Should I or anyone be passed on a bad day?

Well, I guess it all depends. Do you take into consideration other factors (i.e. contribution to the art, etc.). Is the candidate consistently failing to make the standard during the pre-test workouts and such? What if the candidate had proven themselves over and over again in class, in competition, at seminars, demonstrations, etc? Obviously, I am talking abut serious candidates who have spent years dedicated to training, teaching and working the art. These are the exceptions. If "run of the mill" candidates have bad days, I will continue to fail them.

I agree. When I see ‘perfection’ at Dan tests… it’s OK…but it only shows me that the candidate has rehearsed his compulsories well. And that’s fine.

But then I think…what if under stress…when under the influence of the chemical cocktail…and when his skills plunge to about 50% of what they usually are in the dojo?

How will he recover and continue on?

So when I see someone at a test make a blunder…I also look at he handles it in recovery.

Example: Candidate misses a block or a bunkai/kumite sequence…does he get hit or is he able to improvise and finish his attack/defense…letting the judges decide his overall performance?

I place lots of value on this recovery.

[Bill Glasheen]

I place lots of value on this recovery.

I do as well.

I've probably watched about 10,000 people doing stuff at a test. By now your brain is in autopilot, watching the well-rehearsed routines and listing the technical errors that you've seen committed thousands and thousands of times before. Maybe you're jotting down little check and x marks by their name on a sheet of paper.

And then somebody goofs.

My brain kicks out of alpha wave mode.

Candidate is under stress and schit has just happened. How do they handle it? Better yet, their partner makes a major blunder in their yakusoku kumite. They do "the wrong" attack. What happens? Does the recipient receive the phantom technique or do they handle what the person actually threw at them? Can they make it look like they meant it all along?

When it comes to over-choreographed tests, I place a LOT more value in these hiccups than I do on the rest of the test. This is what separates the eagles from the mockingbirds.

- Bill

[Bill Glasheen]

Sorry Bill, my statement still stands.

Been there, done that, Mike. Dad was a debating coach. Your statement was a classic strawman tactic. Say something ridiculous, attribute the ridiculous idea to the person you're debating, and then attack "the strawman."

Re-read what you wrote. Why would anyone send someone up if you don't expect them to pass, Mike? Why would you expect them to do well on a test when they don't do well in the dojo? Indeed, Mike, why are you attributing thinking like this to ME? What does it have to do with this discussion?

What if the candidate had proven themselves over and over again in class, in competition, at seminars, demonstrations, etc. Obviously, I am talking abut serious candidates who have spent years dedicated to training, teaching and working the art.

Let me give you a good example - Shelly Dunn. He's an outstanding instructor in the Mid-Atlantic region. Shelly is built like a brick schithouse. Shelly uses his body for a living. Shelly teaches Uechi, and has studied from some of the best. You do not want to get Shelly Dunn for sparring if he decides he wants to hurt you that day.

But...

Shelly got in front of a board at his godan test, and had a hiccup in his designated kata. He'd probably done it over 10,000 times. But on the test, he'd get to a certain point in the kata and then hit brain fart mode.

They gave him two more chances. Each time he had the brain fart.

The New England board failed him.

George sent Shelly Dunn down to me for a one-on-one makeup test. We all knew he was good. But... Shelly had to get through the test.

So I set up a very formal affair, and had Shelly do it again. And guess what? Brain fart mode again!!!

Deer in headlights

A mental state of high arousal caused by anxiety, fear, panic, surprise and/or confusion, or substance abuse. A person experiencing the "deer in headlights" syndrome often shows behavioral signs reminding those of a deer subjected to a car's headlights, such as widely opened eyes and a transcient lack of motor reactions.

I would like Mr. Mindset (a.k.a. Van Canna) to write more about this. But let's just say the following:

• Shelly had never experienced this before - until the test.
• This happens in real fights. And people lose their lives because of it.
• Shelly didn't know why it was happening. This was a teaching moment.

So I explained the phenomenon to Shelly. We worked on what was happening. I made him aware of what he was feeling when it happened. I put "it" out there, and helped Shelly see the demon for what it was. I taught him some coping skills.

We then re-did the re-do. Shelly passed.

Fast forward years later. Shelly is at Massachusettes Maritime Academy doing his rokudan test - a big deal in IUKF. He's in the middle of Sanseiryu, and there is a Shelly brain fart. He pauses briefly without changing the expression on his face. Then he continues and finishes the kata. If you didn't know the form, you probably wouldn't know Shelly did it. But Shelly knew it. I knew it. The board knew it. And we all were satisfied with his newly-found coping mechanism.

Chances are this is a lot less likely to happen in a real fight for Shelly now. We have done him a service that we never could have performed without a venue that gave Shelly a VERY REAL chance of failure and embarrassment in front of God and the world.



Failure is an important part of life, Mike. Why are we shielding people from life in the martial experience? Why not instead teach them to deal with failure? Are there valuable, life-saving lessons in those failures?

Ever consider that in Major League Baseball, that the best batters ALWAYS fail more than 60 percent of the time?

How many people are going to go through life today in the same job, with no interruption of their career?

What are you going to do if you walk through a door and somebody cold-cocks you? Can that happen? Does it happen? Now what?

Get Rory to tell you some time about experiencing deer-in-the-headlights syndrome during a drug raid.

- Bill

[miked]

" Your statement was a classic strawman tactic. Say something ridiculous, attribute the ridiculous idea to the person you're debating, and then attack "the strawman."

Re-read what you wrote. Why would anyone send someone up if you don't expect them to pass, Mike? Why would you expect them to do well on a test when they don't do well in the dojo? Indeed, Mike, why are you attributing thinking like this to ME? What does it have to do with this discussion? "
----------------------------------------------------------
Bill, I was not attacking you. I was making a point that, in my view, the instructor should have put enough pressure on the candidate such that there was reasonable assurance that the candidate would pass. In other words, the "test" should have been "passed" in the dojo, in competition, at demonstrations, at pre-test workouts long before the candidate came before the board. I am not suggesting that the dan test be replaced. Far from it. I am suggesting that any candidate should have already exceeded expectations (at least in the mind of the instructor) before he/she came before the board. To do so otherwise is to set up a candidate for failure. An instructor may choose to do this in order to make a point with a particular student for a situation which may be better handled within the dojo.

You and Van have brought up some interesting points concerning test performances which, in my opinion, has gone beyond the meaning of this particular thread. I will, therefore, start a new thread on test performance.

Regards,

Mike DeDonato
www.uechi-la.org
mjdcgb@ca.rr.com