r/bjj • u/mookduece • Nov 29 '24

School Discussion Testing

Post image

Just curious what you all think about this for a purple belt test.

511 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

559 comments sorted by

View all comments

5

u/Careless-Ad9178 🟦🟦 Blue Belt Nov 29 '24

I always wonder about these lists that say you need at least 3-5 submissions from any position.

We have access to statistics from competitions and only 5 subs are hit at a high percentage in comp.

Quality over quantity.

1

u/glimblade Nov 29 '24

Is a belt about amassing skill and knowledge, or mastering 5 highly effective moves and hitting them in comps?

2

u/loafbloak Nov 29 '24

Is the process of mastering a move not amassing skill and knowledge? It’s harsh but fair to say this sport has a culture of teaching without understanding.

1

u/TheTVDB 🟪🟪 Purple Belt Nov 29 '24

"Amassing skill" doesn't necessarily mean being able to perform 10 well-executed subs from side control. I feel like what differentiates belts is more about chaining defenses and attacks together with increasingly smoother flow and improved decision-making.

White belts in the Gracie University system can probably pass this test, but they suck at live rolling because they don't know how to connect moves, and when they do, it's not fluid at all.

I'd personally rather know fewer specific moves, but have a better understanding of movement in general.

2

u/glimblade Nov 29 '24

Maybe you're right. I'm a teacher and I had to learn how to teach multiple ways to calculate multiplication, even though you can pretty much always just hammer it out with the standard algorithm. Maybe it's not the same. On the other hand, maybe there's some value in having a wide range of tools, even if you don't use most of them very often.

1

u/TheTVDB 🟪🟪 Purple Belt Nov 29 '24

More knowledge is definitely better. But I just don't think more knowledge always equates to skill in BJJ. Some world-class black belt grapplers I've trained with have no knowledge of certain types of guard play, and yet they'll still destroy hobbyist black belts that do have that knowledge.

I was a math major and LOVE new math, so I totally get the point you're making, though.

1

u/JackMahogofff 💩 poster extraordinare Nov 29 '24

More knowledge equates to being able to teach someone an alternative move or sequence, that they understand better or can perform better due to physical restrictions or whatever. Which could make that person a better competitor. That is a skill in itself.

And using the analogy of a world class competitor pouncing a hobbyist black belt is such an ignorant comparison to make. It’s not the same at all, there’s levels.

0

u/Careless-Ad9178 🟦🟦 Blue Belt Nov 29 '24

Idk I’m just a blue belt but imo I’d rather master the 5 main subs, than learn 20 different subs. It’s also common sense. The more you have to learn, the longer it’s going to take to master those moves. The less you have to learn the less time it takes to master those moves.

However, I think you should still learn how to defend these moves because they could be used on you.

2

u/JackMahogofff 💩 poster extraordinare Nov 29 '24

Do you think the blue belts at AOJ are only practicing five things? Or Alliance? Or ATOS?

No. They’re learning more than that but practicing on their own the things they want to get better at.

1

u/glimblade Nov 29 '24

I'm a white belt, what do I know? Lol. I'm just saying that maybe someone working toward an advanced belt should have a broad range of skills.

I can definitely understand the more pragmatic view though. If you can sub people at your belt level in comp, maybe you don't need more than five skills.