I read a post somewhere that if belts measured ability people would have to give them back once their health declined. That dude may have been right. The concept that belts measure ability may be flawed. Perhaps people should stress knowledge as the benchmark? The question still remains of how to measure that. Is it rolling on the mats? Ability to teach it? success in competition? probability that the person could defend themself in a street fight (after all this bjj thing wasn’t started for sport). I can think of a couple people who have great understanding of the “concepts” of bjj but wouldn’t be considered a “super star” on the mats. If winning in competition is the measure, then do we need to qualify who the wins are over? Over who long of a time period of competing? 7 years? 10years? Since people are gonna adapt bjj to their person body, styles, prefrences, etc… is this something that should be done more on an individual basis. If so, then what is the best means of measuring. Is character a factor, how do we really know all the people in class? What makes you think you know me? bc you know my first and last name? you know where i work? you’ve been out to the bar with me and chick?

It all boils down to who the instructor/ org is and what the feel is a good mearsuring stick. What they feel has value?

To B Brown, thank you for the post. It certainly gave me a few things to think about.