BJJ Black belt promotion criteria

[Your Noodly Master]

I'm at 6 years of training about to be promoted to brown belt. I thought I understood my instructor's promotion standards, but now I'm confused.

Promotions to blue,purple, and brown are based on merit and ability and are consistent. Black belt promotions are odd.

One upcoming promotion to black is for someone that has been training about 8 years, brown for 3. Other purple belts and I handle him pretty easily. My instructor says he's being promoted because he's been around a long time and he shares his Jiu Jitsu philosophy.

Another brown belt with about 11 years experience smashes everyone in the gym, wins tournaments , and has been brown for about 4 years. he's one of the best people I've ever rolled with and that includes black belts. My instructor says he won't even be the next one promoted.

Another guy was promoted to black belt after being injured and not training the majority of 5 years after getting purple.

I think personal relationships are in play here. I'd like someone to try to make some sense of this.

What is your school's criteria for promotion to Black Belt?

 

[DatCutman]

Was just talking about this with the wife last night. We're both black belts (I'm first degree, she's an ignorant nothing-degree), and she's recently coming back into the game after recovering from having our kid. She loathes the fact that she still has to wear the black belt. I don't get what her fuss is. The following viewpoints emerge.

She is of the philosophy that for all BJJ belts, there should be both a technical knowledge requirement (the ability to successfully land techniques in live rolling, i.e., you should have hit 2 sweeps from ____ guard, a submission from ____guard, etc.), and a general beatdown requirement (i.e., brown belts should always smash white belts, no excuses). I asked her if that meant that people who gained a belt but lost ability due to injury, time out, life getting in the way of training, etc., got demoted. She said yes, and that she wishes she could get demoted, as being out for a year+ has dulled her skills, and she feels like a bad representation of the school for being a rusty black belt. She likened it to the Sumo ranking system, where you move up and down based on performance, and that even a Yokozuna has to give up their spot if they start to degrade. Women are brutal.

I'm a hippy by comparison, because when I was a young boy I saw a Helio Gracie interview where he said belts are for demonstrating your ability to understand and transmit BJJ, and that fighting ability is a separate thing. If you want proof of fighting ability, that's what tournament medals/MMA belts are for. Those document your fighting ability within that period of time, not your belt. An older, less athletic 4th degree black belt is going to have some cool shit to tell you. Just because he isn't fast enough to pull it off on the black belt adult competitors doesn't mean he is worse at BJJ than the youngsters. And when you're looking for someone to teach you things, it helps to have a color code of "who can teach me more cool shit" as opposed to "who is a fucking monster."

The flaw in her approach is that, practically, it's a fucking nightmare. Tournaments would be insane. Sandbagging would be worse than ever. Unless people started having their tournament wins/losses tracked I guess into some kind of promotion points system ala Judo. Small people, women, and the elderly will live their lives fairly low on the totem pole. Getting injured or taking time off means having to start the process over, you'll probably never return. Constantly have to smesh the lower belts. But it would make for some hard ass grapplers. Also then we'd start having to recognize the grappling skill carryover from other arts (i.e., wrestling, judo, etc.), and fast tracking them for promotion. That's practically admitting their art is just as valid is BJJ, which is such haram it makes me want to start a second BJJihad. I'm kid, but it's another facet to consider.

The flaw in my approach is it turns into a TMA if you're not careful, where ability to perform ceases to matter, which is the beginning of the end. It seems more fair, but it also leans more towards arm chair grappling. It also leads to situations like you're discussing above.

I think Judo has a pretty cool concept, but I don't know how you'd scale it with the amount of time required for a black belt in BJJ, and the vast body of (constantly changing) techniques. Hell, we'd have to agree on what "basics" are first, and god help us all for that. Though the idea of a BJJ Self-Defense Kata to shut up the self-defense nerds would be neat.

 

[Knock Out Ned]

I'd like someone to try to make some sense of this

Don’t worry about it.

 

[Your Noodly Master]

I'm not worried. I'm just interested in other opinions as to their methods. Until now I assumed that promotions were lineal, but black seems to be a different criteria, at least at my school. Someday if I'm in the position to promote to black I'd like to have as much knowledge about the process as possible.

 

[KikoJones]

Don’t worry about it.

^ Exactly.

Each Professor decides what that criteria is. Its so subjective that no matter the answer, you won't like it.

 

[Dirty Holt]

The problem lies in the proximity of other black belts. In SoCal, NorCal, Las Vegas, NY, there are tons of black belts. No one lets someone who is hanging in there or beating other blackbelts sit around at brown belt. In places where a blackbelt gets you special privilege, access to teaching or running a school based only on your rank, or special notoriety because of your "special" black belt, then you see these gym owners who are black belts get super stiff and stingy when it comes to the black belt.

I know this because I trained in a big metropolis where there werent many black belts, but a freaking boatload of purple and brown belts who were complete destroyers; many should have been black belts. Then I moved to SoCal and my suburb had more blackbelts than my entire previous major city.

 

[Evenflow80]

I'm only a blue belt, but in my humble opinion being given a black belt simply denotes your dedication and time on the mats. Technical KNOWLEDGE (i.e, being able to teach moves and techniques correctly) should take priority over you actually landing the subs in live rolling. If you are old, get injured, etc, suddenly you are not a black belt anymore? The knowledge is still, just execution in live rolling is gone due to factors outside your control.

I've rolled with plently of brown or even black belts who are much older and frankly, technically suck but after a roll they would still offer me simple tips and often times they are gamechangers for me. Like as a white belt after rolling with a much much older brown he told me a simple tip: when on top and passing I should try using my head to put pressure on opponents chest and shoulders. So simple, yet once I incorproated this in my game it worked wonders for me. The technical knowledge is still there and thus should be reflected in the belt.

 

[Hotora86]

Coming from a TMA background, the basis for belt grading was always the knowledge and ability to pass it on, not the performance. Thus, a black belt is basically someone who knows the entire curriculum by heart and is able to teach students from complete noob level up to his own level. 5th degree and higher degrees are awarded for "merit" - seminars, books, spreading or representing the art.

My first sensei is a 4th degree black belt. He's 70 years old and is getting hip surgery soon so even a white belt could kick his ass at this point. But he has raised a dozen black belts and innumerable browns over the last 40 years. THAT is his value as black belt.

 

[Kingbedlam]

Was just talking about this with the wife last night. We're both black belts (I'm first degree, she's an ignorant nothing-degree), and she's recently coming back into the game after recovering from having our kid. She loathes the fact that she still has to wear the black belt. I don't get what her fuss is. The following viewpoints emerge.

She is of the philosophy that for all BJJ belts, there should be both a technical knowledge requirement (the ability to successfully land techniques in live rolling, i.e., you should have hit 2 sweeps from ____ guard, a submission from ____guard, etc.), and a general beatdown requirement (i.e., brown belts should always smash white belts, no excuses). I asked her if that meant that people who gained a belt but lost ability due to injury, time out, life getting in the way of training, etc., got demoted. She said yes, and that she wishes she could get demoted, as being out for a year+ has dulled her skills, and she feels like a bad representation of the school for being a rusty black belt. She likened it to the Sumo ranking system, where you move up and down based on performance, and that even a Yokozuna has to give up their spot if they start to degrade. Women are brutal.

I'm a hippy by comparison, because when I was a young boy I saw a Helio Gracie interview where he said belts are for demonstrating your ability to understand and transmit BJJ, and that fighting ability is a separate thing. If you want proof of fighting ability, that's what tournament medals/MMA belts are for. Those document your fighting ability within that period of time, not your belt. An older, less athletic 4th degree black belt is going to have some cool shit to tell you. Just because he isn't fast enough to pull it off on the black belt adult competitors doesn't mean he is worse at BJJ than the youngsters. And when you're looking for someone to teach you things, it helps to have a color code of "who can teach me more cool shit" as opposed to "who is a fucking monster."

The flaw in her approach is that, practically, it's a fucking nightmare. Tournaments would be insane. Sandbagging would be worse than ever. Unless people started having their tournament wins/losses tracked I guess into some kind of promotion points system ala Judo. Small people, women, and the elderly will live their lives fairly low on the totem pole. Getting injured or taking time off means having to start the process over, you'll probably never return. Constantly have to smesh the lower belts. But it would make for some hard ass grapplers. Also then we'd start having to recognize the grappling skill carryover from other arts (i.e., wrestling, judo, etc.), and fast tracking them for promotion. That's practically admitting their art is just as valid is BJJ, which is such haram it makes me want to start a second BJJihad. I'm kid, but it's another facet to consider.

The flaw in my approach is it turns into a TMA if you're not careful, where ability to perform ceases to matter, which is the beginning of the end. It seems more fair, but it also leans more towards arm chair grappling. It also leads to situations like you're discussing above.

I think Judo has a pretty cool concept, but I don't know how you'd scale it with the amount of time required for a black belt in BJJ, and the vast body of (constantly changing) techniques. Hell, we'd have to agree on what "basics" are first, and god help us all for that. Though the idea of a BJJ Self-Defense Kata to shut up the self-defense nerds would be neat.

Yeah, I kind of understand where your wife is coming from, but damn would you lose practitioners and even some teachers if something like that was implemented. One of the best teachers I ever had was off the mats for a good year because he had to get knee surgery, and when he came back he just couldn't roll like he used to (still an amazing teacher though). He's a third degree black belt, and it would be pretty messed up for him to lose ranking because of something out of his control.

 

[eneck]

The BJJ tracks are given for technical dexterity, discipline, fighting ability and theoretical knowledge of the sport.

If you have not yet passed. Duty is failing this.

 

[asian-glow]

My instructor has promoted one person to black belt, with the blessing of his own instructor. One of the things my instructor was asked was whether the person he considered promoting was "one of us" - represented the values of the school. This person is definitely a very principled person. His bjj is not great though. He got his black belt.

I've asked my instructor what I would need to be promoted to black. I also told him I am contemplating quitting after I get it. He said that he would need his black belts to be dedicated (i.e. not quit the art). At best, my plan was to get my black belt in the gi and then switch to 10th planet - he knows this as well. Either way, my actions wouldn't be looked upon as dedicated. Skill wise, he says I am "there". I respect him for being honest with me.

My point is it was more than just skill to him. It was about sending a message.

 

[tekkenfan]

I'm at 6 years of training about to be promoted to brown belt. I thought I understood my instructor's promotion standards, but now I'm confused.

Promotions to blue,purple, and brown are based on merit and ability and are consistent. Black belt promotions are odd.

One upcoming promotion to black is for someone that has been training about 8 years, brown for 3. Other purple belts and I handle him pretty easily. My instructor says he's being promoted because he's been around a long time and he shares his Jiu Jitsu philosophy.

Another brown belt with about 11 years experience smashes everyone in the gym, wins tournaments , and has been brown for about 4 years. he's one of the best people I've ever rolled with and that includes black belts. My instructor says he won't even be the next one promoted.

Another guy was promoted to black belt after being injured and not training the majority of 5 years after getting purple.

I think personal relationships are in play here. I'd like someone to try to make some sense of this.

What is your school's criteria for promotion to Black Belt?

your lucky u dont have to do a 100 move self defense test to get your black belt making sure u dont miss a single detail

 

[Alech33]

Every instructor is different as far as what they look for but you mention people who have been training short. Of time to smash everybody. That's definitely good criteria for promotions but sometimes instructors don't want to rank them up too quick. There's a lot that can be factored besides just abilities. Some instructors at how they carry themselves, sometimes it's their training habits, you could be there technique, sometimes it's just yours on the mat. It doesn't hurt to ask your instructor what they look for in a black belt but I will say that rolling abilities are only one factor

 

[Your Noodly Master]

The problem lies in the proximity of other black belts. In SoCal, NorCal, Las Vegas, NY, there are tons of black belts. No one lets someone who is hanging in there or beating other blackbelts sit around at brown belt. In places where a blackbelt gets you special privilege, access to teaching or running a school based only on your rank, or special notoriety because of your "special" black belt, then you see these gym owners who are black belts get super stiff and stingy when it comes to the black belt.

I know this because I trained in a big metropolis where there werent many black belts, but a freaking boatload of purple and brown belts who were complete destroyers; many should have been black belts. Then I moved to SoCal and my suburb had more blackbelts than my entire previous major city.

I think that the fear of someone opening another school might be a factor in my case.

 

[Your Noodly Master]

My instructor has promoted one person to black belt, with the blessing of his own instructor. One of the things my instructor was asked was whether the person he considered promoting was "one of us" - represented the values of the school. This person is definitely a very principled person. His bjj is not great though. He got his black belt.

I've asked my instructor what I would need to be promoted to black. I also told him I am contemplating quitting after I get it. He said that he would need his black belts to be dedicated (i.e. not quit the art). At best, my plan was to get my black belt in the gi and then switch to 10th planet - he knows this as well. Either way, my actions wouldn't be looked upon as dedicated. Skill wise, he says I am "there". I respect him for being honest with me.

My point is it was more than just skill to him. It was about sending a message.

I feel that this is exactly what my instructor does, but I don't think it is fair. If you are prepared for the promotion then what you do with your life afterwards is inconsequential to it.

 

[Your Noodly Master]

Was just talking about this with the wife last night. We're both black belts (I'm first degree, she's an ignorant nothing-degree), and she's recently coming back into the game after recovering from having our kid. She loathes the fact that she still has to wear the black belt. I don't get what her fuss is. The following viewpoints emerge.

She is of the philosophy that for all BJJ belts, there should be both a technical knowledge requirement (the ability to successfully land techniques in live rolling, i.e., you should have hit 2 sweeps from ____ guard, a submission from ____guard, etc.), and a general beatdown requirement (i.e., brown belts should always smash white belts, no excuses). I asked her if that meant that people who gained a belt but lost ability due to injury, time out, life getting in the way of training, etc., got demoted. She said yes, and that she wishes she could get demoted, as being out for a year+ has dulled her skills, and she feels like a bad representation of the school for being a rusty black belt. She likened it to the Sumo ranking system, where you move up and down based on performance, and that even a Yokozuna has to give up their spot if they start to degrade. Women are brutal.

I'm a hippy by comparison, because when I was a young boy I saw a Helio Gracie interview where he said belts are for demonstrating your ability to understand and transmit BJJ, and that fighting ability is a separate thing. If you want proof of fighting ability, that's what tournament medals/MMA belts are for. Those document your fighting ability within that period of time, not your belt. An older, less athletic 4th degree black belt is going to have some cool shit to tell you. Just because he isn't fast enough to pull it off on the black belt adult competitors doesn't mean he is worse at BJJ than the youngsters. And when you're looking for someone to teach you things, it helps to have a color code of "who can teach me more cool shit" as opposed to "who is a fucking monster."

The flaw in her approach is that, practically, it's a fucking nightmare. Tournaments would be insane. Sandbagging would be worse than ever. Unless people started having their tournament wins/losses tracked I guess into some kind of promotion points system ala Judo. Small people, women, and the elderly will live their lives fairly low on the totem pole. Getting injured or taking time off means having to start the process over, you'll probably never return. Constantly have to smesh the lower belts. But it would make for some hard ass grapplers. Also then we'd start having to recognize the grappling skill carryover from other arts (i.e., wrestling, judo, etc.), and fast tracking them for promotion. That's practically admitting their art is just as valid is BJJ, which is such haram it makes me want to start a second BJJihad. I'm kid, but it's another facet to consider.

The flaw in my approach is it turns into a TMA if you're not careful, where ability to perform ceases to matter, which is the beginning of the end. It seems more fair, but it also leans more towards arm chair grappling. It also leads to situations like you're discussing above.

I think Judo has a pretty cool concept, but I don't know how you'd scale it with the amount of time required for a black belt in BJJ, and the vast body of (constantly changing) techniques. Hell, we'd have to agree on what "basics" are first, and god help us all for that. Though the idea of a BJJ Self-Defense Kata to shut up the self-defense nerds would be neat.

I side with your style of thinking over your wife's. There's no clear answer, but demotions and recurrent evaluations after injuries and absences would be a nightmare. Ego is a big factor in people not returning after extended periods because they can't "defend their belt".

I don't expect to beat everyone lower ranked every time. I'm 45, 190. We have a blue belt , 25, about 240, played linebacker in college. My technical skills are far above his, but physically I'm overmatched. It's a great example of the points you made.

All martial arts become TMAs eventually for the individual due to age, but BJJ will remain superior to other arts for people in their prime.

 

[Knock Out Ned]

^ Exactly.

Each Professor decides what that criteria is. Its so subjective that no matter the answer, you won't like it.

I spent 4 years at brown (partly my own doing) and competed fairly often.

My teammate who never competed and spent half that time at brown was promoted with me.

Meh, who cares? I didn’t give a damn. I congratulated him, gave him a slap on the back, and went about my business.

 

[Gl0kta]

My view is that should be based upon technical knowledge and performance against your peers.

I wouldn't expect a 50 year old hobbyist to hang with a 20 year old monster training full time, but he better be able to smoke the rest of the over 50s crowd.

Take that requirement away and guys get all TMA.

 

[lechien]

For me, it is usually 1 stripes per 6 months of training.
4 the stripes then the next belt at the next graduation.
Graduation ever 6 months.
If the students does perform well at a competition, I will promote as I don't like sandbagging.
Of for course I still follow ibjjf minimum standards.

 

[ShindoNinja]

As an aging grappler, I struggle with this too. I'm coming up on 42, 1 stripe brown belt that has been training various martial arts my whole life but BJJ/Judo focus for the last 10. I had a real good roll with a 28 year old purple today. We weren't trying to kill each other but I felt his strength and speed. I had to work in the roll, I wasn't toying with him by any means. Anyone watching would say it was pretty even I'm sure. I had some sweeps, some throws, got to the back and briefly threatened a sub or 2. So when I am a black belt will things be the same? I think yes. I'll be 44-45 by then, slower, weaker but I have veteran tricks, sneaky setups and I've seen a lot in my training that I pass in when I teach. I'm sure a world class competition level blue belt would wreck me. So does that mean I should never get a black belt?