Black belt vs. Master vs. Grand Master

[chi-ca]

At what point does a black belt become a "Master" and when does a Master become a "Grand Master"?

[Satt]

Good question, I was wandering the same thing. :asian:

[MJS]

All depends on the system. Could you be a bit more specific?

Mike

[Miles]

A Master is a teacher of black belts (and below).

A GrandMaster is a teacher of Masters.

Good Luck in your training!

Miles

[still learning]

Hello, That's a good question. My guess would be anyone who is at least a 6th degree and up could be call a Master and the Grand master would be the 10th degree. Every system is different and each could have their own rankings. Just my thoughts.....Aloha

[Andrew Green]

Often it happens through flying.

Basically what you do is get on a plane in one place as a black belt, then when you land you are a Grandmaster. Ask about it at the airport.

[TigerWoman]

In WTF Taekwondo, a master is 4th dan or above, a Grand Master is 7th, I believe. I witnessed a master test in our school for 4th, it was awesome! TW

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

There used to be a convention for such silliness that went something like this, for general guidelines:
5th degree black or 15 years active = Master. That was the easy part. Grandmaster came with being the highest ranked member of your system/style/organization. Styles may have many masters, but should only have one Grand-Master.

Kinda lets you know where the ego thing steps in. You can imagine that some of the arts that have been around -- and well-marketed -- for awhile have lpenty of guys who fit the "5th degree or 15 years" mark, but are one of dozens who do. So how to become a grand-master? Split the flock, and start your own gig. Poof! (like magic). You're a Grand-Master.

I personally don't like this def. of "Master", because there are plenty of guys in my own art of origin (and its sister/cousin arts) that have been in for aons, and still suck.

"They haven't practiced 20 years of kenpo. They've practiced thier 1st year of kenpo, 20 times."
-- Edmund K. Parker

Mastery is a more elusive prey, and is unfortunately not even remotely related to rank and time. If you are passionate and absorbed in what you do, striving for perfection even though it is unattainable, as approximately 15-20 years go by, you will develop an excellence of your craft and an ownership of skill that is undeniable to others in your field. When you are the marble floor layer that the other flooring guys call because your reputation precedes you; when you are the doctor who is sent articles for review by peer reviewed journals; when you are the BJJ senior who is called by other BJJ instructors for clarity on what defines a certain technique "well done", or a kenpo black belt who is asked by other kenpo black belts to show them how its done...that's mastery. Exemplary performance; absolute ownership of concepts and materials. Peer recognition not a pre-requisite (some may live in obscurity and still be masters...Leonardo and Michaelangelo did much of their work out of public scrutiny).

Unfortunately, peer and public recognition -- and not personal passion -- is what drives most martials artists to declare themselves masters or grandmasters long before they have become exemplars of their craft, or meet even the most minimal of criteria (i.e., the "5/15" rule of thumb).

Dave

[chi-ca]

There used to be a convention for such silliness that went something like this, for general guidelines:
5th degree black or 15 years active = Master. That was the easy part. Grandmaster came with being the highest ranked member of your system/style/organization. Styles may have many masters, but should only have one Grand-Master . . . . Unfortunately, peer and public recognition -- and not personal passion -- is what drives most martials artists to declare themselves masters or grandmasters long before they have become exemplars of their craft, or meet even the most minimal of criteria (i.e., the "5/15" rule of thumb).

Dave
Thanks Dave,
That was helpful!
Chi-ca

[bart]

It really depends on the system. A black belt has generally learned the curriculum of the system and is not poised to really learn the system. A master has achieved that level and has also taught others usually bringing at least one of their students to the black belt level. Some systems can have only one grandmaster. Others can have several with no trouble. Grandmaster generally refers to a leader within a system or art who has produced masters and contributed to the art in a significant way. Grandmaster is also sometimes awarded for support and contribution to the welfare of the art rather than excellence or achievement within it. Usually that is conferred as honorary though.

In general it's best to understand that grandmaster is higher than master is higher than black belt. Other than that, it depends greatly on what system you are looking at.

[Cruentus]

At what point does a black belt become a "Master" and when does a Master become a "Grand Master"?

It really does depend on the system, and sometimes region plays a role.

In Modern Arnis (a modern Filipino art that I do), one could be considered a "master instructor" at 5th degree (Lakan Apat; which actually translates to 'male 4').

In Anciong's original Balintawak (Manong Ted Buot Lineage) [a more traditional Filipino art that I do], your basically a student. At some point your teacher may refer to you as "an eskrimador" to others when he feels that you can handle yourself, but that is as far as it goes. We call our teacher "Manong" which is an endearing term that sort of means 'uncle.' We may refer to our Manong as "Grandmaster" when speaking to Americans so that they will understand his status. But, in reality, there isn't really a belt system, or a master or GM title.

In Korean ITF TKD you were considered a master instructor at 5th. In WTF it was 4th. I assume that something along these lines is the same for the other Korean arts...

In Western arts like old European arms and pugalism schools, the "master" or Meastro was whoever was the teacher, or whoever owned the school. There were no belts, and the person with the title didn't even have to be "good" to have the title. Grandmasters had to be 'good' though, otherwise someone would challenge them and ruin their name (or even kill them).

In Chinese arts, and each one is different, but a lot of the traditional ones you are just a student for a very long time...no belts. Then, when you have 'mastered' the system you become a Sifu, which means teacher.

Japanese arts can be a little more strict with giving out 'master' titles, from what I understand.

So, as I am sure your getting, there is no easy answer to your question.

Important Point: I think the problem that occurs with these titles today is that no one can really challenge them anymore. Before our wonderful litigation system, you could take the title of "master" or "grandmaster" if you wanted, any time you wanted too. Your teacher might stop teaching you if he felt you were misrepresenting yourself, though. But, people could challenge you without having to worry about legal repricusions. So, being called 'master' or some simliar title too soon could mean humiliation, injury, or even death.

Now a days, anyone can get a black belt through the internet, anyone can make any claims to mastery all they want; and there is no quality control or proving ground.

I think that is why you see a lot of the "masters" and "grandmasters" that you see today...

Paul

[Miles]

Important Point: I think the problem that occurs with these titles today is that no one can really challenge them anymore. Before our wonderful litigation system, you could take the title of "master" or "grandmaster" if you wanted, any time you wanted too. Your teacher might stop teaching you if he felt you were misrepresenting yourself, though. But, people could challenge you without having to worry about legal repricusions. So, being called 'master' or some simliar title too soon could mean humiliation, injury, or even death.

Now a days, anyone can get a black belt through the internet, anyone can make any claims to mastery all they want; and there is no quality control or proving ground.

I think that is why you see a lot of the "masters" and "grandmasters" that you see today...

Paul

Paul, I disagree with you that the problem is due to a litigious society, but agree that there are not a lot of standards.

In Taekwondo (Kukkiwon), there are standards though unfortunately, sometimes they are not adhered to. People tend to do what they want and call themselves whatever title they can think of. In Korea, one can not get a business license to open a Taekwondo school without passing the Kukkiwon 3rd Class instructor course (for 4th-6th dans).

In the USA, one can get a business license to teach any martial art without proving any ability. That's not the fault of the lawyers, it is the fault of martial artists.

Miles
(lawyer and graduate of 3rd Class Instructor Course :)

[Ronin Moose]

MILES: What a shock to look at your profile and see that you are an attorney.
I have always believed that Wm. Shakespeare had it right. Regards...

[Miles]

MILES: What a shock to look at your profile and see that you are an attorney.
I have always believed that Wm. Shakespeare had it right. Regards...

Why shocked?

You mean Shakespeare's line, "First we kiSS all the lawyers?" :)

Miles

[Cruentus]

Paul, I disagree with you that the problem is due to a litigious society, but agree that there are not a lot of standards.

In Taekwondo (Kukkiwon), there are standards though unfortunately, sometimes they are not adhered to. People tend to do what they want and call themselves whatever title they can think of. In Korea, one can not get a business license to open a Taekwondo school without passing the Kukkiwon 3rd Class instructor course (for 4th-6th dans).

In the USA, one can get a business license to teach any martial art without proving any ability. That's not the fault of the lawyers, it is the fault of martial artists.

Miles
(lawyer and graduate of 3rd Class Instructor Course :)

Well, I guess that came out all wrong. Sorry, your right. I am not blaming it on lawyers, really. It's more or less because we are more "civilized..." so there is none of the old "So your a "master" eh? Prove it, lets fight." If one beats up another over a silly title, then one will end up in jail or sued. I actually think that this is a good thing, however sometimes good things have negative consequences. The negative consequence in this case is a lot of people walking around with titles that they don't deserve or cannot uphold.

Now...please don't sue me! :angel: lol ;)

[Miles]

The negative consequence in this case is a lot of people walking around with titles that they don't deserve or cannot uphold.

Now...please don't sue me! :angel: lol ;)
Paul,

:) No suit filed...but it IS a holiday, so the Courts are closed! :)

Lots of folks get hung up on and love to be referred to by titles-that's human nature-they want to have that recognition. It's the same reason you see folks with stripes up and down their belts and patches all over their multi-colored uniforms. At the Instructor Course in Korea, if you even wore one of those Adidas uniforms with the stripes, they would not let you take the final test.

Take Care,

Miles

[TigerWoman]

[QUOTE=MilesAt the Instructor Course in Korea, if you even wore one of those Adidas uniforms with the stripes, they would not let you take the final test.[/QUOTE]

I guess that is why I could never wear one with stripes. They are for Grandmaster's? Just curious, since my instructor, 5th, wears one with stripes. TW

[Miles]

[QUOTE=MilesAt the Instructor Course in Korea, if you even wore one of those Adidas uniforms with the stripes, they would not let you take the final test.
I guess that is why I could never wear one with stripes. They are for Grandmaster's? Just curious, since my instructor, 5th, wears one with stripes. TW[/QUOTE]
TW, anyone can wear the uniform-you just have to have the $$ to buy one. At the course, they wanted the attendees to concentrate on their TKD, not their appearance. So, they wanted plain, unadorned white doboks-no patches/stripes, etc.

Miles

[MichiganTKD]

it is more than that though.

In WTF Tae Kwon Do, 1st-3rd Dans are considered Black Belts/Assistant Instructors; 4th-6th Dan is considered Master Instructor/Senior Master; 7th is considered Junior Grandmaster; 8th-9th Dans are considered Grandmaster and Senior Grandmaster. Those are your "official" ranks.

Then there is what those ranks really mean. The ranks of 1st-3rd Dan are concerned with the technical aspects of Tae Kwon Do. Your jobs are to:
1. Learn and practice as much technique as you can
2. Help junior students understand the basic manners and etiquette of your school.
3. Assist your Instructor. Notice, I did not say break off and form your own school as soon as you can.
4. Represent your organization and school at various Tae Kwon Do activities in the area. There is more, but I don't want to go too much into it.

The duties and responsibilities of a Master Instructor include the following:
1. Teach and guide the black belts in your organization. Not just in physical technique, but in manners/etiquette, history, and their duties as Dan holders.
2. Be a model of Tae Kwon Do, personal, civil, and national behavior. Real Master Instructors are involved in their communities to help the welfare of students and non-students alike. They do not have, as I like to call, "ugly minds". They are not concerned with making money off Tae Kwon Do, getting their faces in magazines, or self promotion. Their reputation should be excellent.
3. They begin to develop black belts of their own and grow their class and organization.
Being a true Master Instructor is an awesome responsibility, much like being a parent.

A Grandmaster Instructor has the following duties:
1. Develop, teach, and guide Master Instructors in your organization.
2. Be a leader of Tae Kwon Do on the national and world stage. I've read about so-called "Grandmasters" with 2-3 schools in the same area. These are not Grandmasters. A junior instructor can do that. A Grandmaster is recognized nationally and worldwide for their contributions to Tae Kwon Do
3. Develop your own Tae Kwon Do organization. Up til now, your teaching was done under the eyes of your Instructor and with his guidance and help. A Grandmaster is his own man, responsible for himself. His Instructor can no longer control how he runs his organization. Same is true in the West. Once you have established yourself as an adult, your father can no longer tell you how to run your life. It is strictly up to you.

[TigerWoman]

Thanks MichTKD for the excellent breakdown. But to have control of your own school and its income to wait to become Grandmaster first seems a bit much. How would anyone be able to support a family on one school when you are sending part and testings to the Grandmaster? (not that I'm ever going to) I just think its no wonder masters break away-it's for survival. TW

[MichiganTKD]

Tigerwoman,

Easy to answer. Don't have Tae Kwon Do be your primary source of income. Our Grandmaster has told us many times not to rely on Tae Kwon Do for money, because then you don't have to compromise your integrity by being greedy.
You can make money from TKD, but don't rely on it for income.

[Miles]

Excellent analysis MichTKD!

Miles

[MichiganTKD]

Thanks Miles.
I really do appreciate the kind words.

[dmdfromhamilton]

i had no idea the definition of master was so different from style to style... until today i thought master was 6th dan 7th Dan Seniior master and 8th dan grandmaster and 9th dan grandmaster but reseved for the head of the style but its intersting to see that tkd considers a 4th dan a master

[James Kovacich]

Well, I guess that came out all wrong. Sorry, your right. I am not blaming it on lawyers, really. It's more or less because we are more "civilized..." so there is none of the old "So your a "master" eh? Prove it, lets fight." If one beats up another over a silly title, then one will end up in jail or sued. I actually think that this is a good thing, however sometimes good things have negative consequences. The negative consequence in this case is a lot of people walking around with titles that they don't deserve or cannot uphold.

Now...please don't sue me! :angel: lol ;)
Paul, don't take this wrong but is there a differance in "claims" such as claimimg to be a master and one such as your signature.

I'm definatlely not trying to disrespect you. Just when I read I read your signature I thought about it. :asian:

Personally on the master issue I think it should come from your master instructor or higher.

[Cruentus]

Paul, don't take this wrong but is there a differance in "claims" such as claimimg to be a master and one such as your signature.

I'm definatlely not trying to disrespect you. Just when I read I read your signature I thought about it. :asian:

Personally on the master issue I think it should come from your master instructor or higher.

Long post ahead, as I have been put on the spot a bit:

No disrespect taken, akja. There is a difference with my title, and that difference is that I am honest about it. My title was legitimately obtained. I recieved a 5th degree (Lakan Apat in Modern Arnis) from Remy Presas. 5th degree is considered "master" in my circles.

However, because I don't want to play the political game in the Modern Arnis or martial arts world, I don't claim any authority in any one elses martial art. Therefore, I have moved in my own direction, and taken more of a tactical approach with a western martial arts model. Historically, in western martial arts, school owners of "arms" schools or pugalist schools were often referred to as "master, Master teacher, Master instructor, master at arms, master of defense, etc. etc." Being a school owner, they took whatever title they wanted. The "Master" title was commonly used, and there was no requirement that the title must be recieved from a higher source. You just had to be able to prove what you had, otherwise people wouldn't train with you, and you risked being challenged to a duel and killed if you were dubious with your claim to Master. The title that I chose to go by my written signature is "Master of Defense." I have just started my own self-defense training company called "Tulisan Tactical Training." At the moment I focus on private instruction and seminar training for tactical close-quarters defense with both empty hand and weapons for both operators and civilians. I am also exploring and research/developing historical martial arts programs.

Now these are all new efforts for me, and I can garauntee that I will be making major changes and updates for 05.' I may change the names and the structure of things, but fundamentally my focus on both tactical training and historical martial arts will remain the same. I may drop the whole "master of defense" thing and just go with "master instructor;" or I may go with no title at all. This is a learning and growing process for me.

But, the fact is, I obtained a master title by the standards of the traditional martial arts world, in that I was given rank and am recognized as such by instructors superior to me. So it is legitimate in that regard. The important thing is that I am honest about where the title comes from.

The problem with these titles is that many people who go by them are not honest about how they obtained them, thus the standards for these titles have been significantly lowered over the years. People pay for dubious rank that gives them these titles. People go to "Soke" associations and boards, and pay money to obtain titles. People give themselves titles, but misrepresent how they were obtained. People are given titles by illegitimate instructors. All these things add up to the pool being pissed in. What makes mine different then many of these is I am honest about it, and my title was not obtained in a dubious fashion.

That all said; now although 20 years of martial arts experience may fit the bill, I am very young to be considered "master" of anything, and I was even younger when I recieved my rank 4 1/2 years ago. I still have many lifetimes of knowledge to study and learn. Plus, people who seek instruction from me are in my age bracket or older. A few of those who seek instruction from me actually have more experience in martial arts then I, and a lot of those who learn from me have more tactical real world experience then I do. This makes my teaching experiences really enjoyable, as I often end up learning from my "students" as well as they learn from me. So, because of this, I don't expect nor want anyone to address me as "master"; on and off the training floor my name is "Paul" (or "Sir" if someone insists on a formality). If someone calls me master, I simply tell them just to call me "Paul." Also, I don't feel comfortable calling those who seek instruction from me "my students," as I feel that we should all be students, and I learn much from those that I teach. I usually refer to them as clients, seminar attendees, or group members if they are officially a member of The Gild which is the instructor certification division.

Final thought: The bottom line with this stuff is just be honest with yourself and everyone else around you. Be honest, and do good work. If your honest about yourself, you do good work, are a good martial artist and a good instructor, and can prove yourself when needed, then titles or legitimacy will take care of itself.

Sorry for the long post.

I hope that I explained everything...

Paul

[bart]

Hey There,


An interesting thing about Master is where the word originates and how it comes into our everyday understanding. Linguistically it comes from the latin word "magister". In classical and medieval latin it generally meant "teacher" or "one who is adept". Languages influenced by latin such as the romance languages, the slavic languages, and the germanic languages inherited a great number of variations: "maestro", "maestre", "master", "mister", "magistrate", "maître". They all however tend to mean the same sort of thing: "a learned teacher, adept at something, and who generally is in charge". The terms "sensei", "sifu", and "guru" all signify the same sort of meaning as "master". But even then the translation is imperfect because each of these terms carries different significance in the originating languages.

Within our separate arts these general terms come to have special meaning. In general they carry a different meaning than in the internal jargon of our styles. Titles that mean something special in one group may be thought ridiculous or offensive in another or may be unintelligible in the great mass of commonspeak. In Britain the American peace symbol (index and middle held up) is the same as the American bird (middle finger). Imagine the kind of confusion that can cause at a rock concert or soccer match. Misunderstanding is rampant when people fail to recognize that the other side of an argument may not be speaking the same language.

[Cruentus]

Nice post Bart, very informative.

:asian:

[James Kovacich]

Long post ahead, as I have been put on the spot a bit:

No disrespect taken, akja. There is a difference with my title, and that difference is that I am honest about it. My title was legitimately obtained. I recieved a 5th degree (Lakan Apat in Modern Arnis) from Remy Presas. 5th degree is considered "master" in my circles.

However, because I don't want to play the political game in the Modern Arnis or martial arts world, I don't claim any authority in any one elses martial art. Therefore, I have moved in my own direction, and taken more of a tactical approach with a western martial arts model. Historically, in western martial arts, school owners of "arms" schools or pugalist schools were often referred to as "master, Master teacher, Master instructor, master at arms, master of defense, etc. etc." Being a school owner, they took whatever title they wanted. The "Master" title was commonly used, and there was no requirement that the title must be recieved from a higher source. You just had to be able to prove what you had, otherwise people wouldn't train with you, and you risked being challenged to a duel and killed if you were dubious with your claim to Master. The title that I chose to go by my written signature is "Master of Defense." I have just started my own self-defense training company called "Tulisan Tactical Training." At the moment I focus on private instruction and seminar training for tactical close-quarters defense with both empty hand and weapons for both operators and civilians. I am also exploring and research/developing historical martial arts programs.

Now these are all new efforts for me, and I can garauntee that I will be making major changes and updates for 05.' I may change the names and the structure of things, but fundamentally my focus on both tactical training and historical martial arts will remain the same. I may drop the whole "master of defense" thing and just go with "master instructor;" or I may go with no title at all. This is a learning and growing process for me.

But, the fact is, I obtained a master title by the standards of the traditional martial arts world, in that I was given rank and am recognized as such by instructors superior to me. So it is legitimate in that regard. The important thing is that I am honest about where the title comes from.

The problem with these titles is that many people who go by them are not honest about how they obtained them, thus the standards for these titles have been significantly lowered over the years. People pay for dubious rank that gives them these titles. People go to "Soke" associations and boards, and pay money to obtain titles. People give themselves titles, but misrepresent how they were obtained. People are given titles by illegitimate instructors. All these things add up to the pool being pissed in. What makes mine different then many of these is I am honest about it, and my title was not obtained in a dubious fashion.

That all said; now although 20 years of martial arts experience may fit the bill, I am very young to be considered "master" of anything, and I was even younger when I recieved my rank 4 1/2 years ago. I still have many lifetimes of knowledge to study and learn. Plus, people who seek instruction from me are in my age bracket or older. A few of those who seek instruction from me actually have more experience in martial arts then I, and a lot of those who learn from me have more tactical real world experience then I do. This makes my teaching experiences really enjoyable, as I often end up learning from my "students" as well as they learn from me. So, because of this, I don't expect nor want anyone to address me as "master"; on and off the training floor my name is "Paul" (or "Sir" if someone insists on a formality). If someone calls me master, I simply tell them just to call me "Paul." Also, I don't feel comfortable calling those who seek instruction from me "my students," as I feel that we should all be students, and I learn much from those that I teach. I usually refer to them as clients, seminar attendees, or group members if they are officially a member of The Gild which is the instructor certification division.

Final thought: The bottom line with this stuff is just be honest with yourself and everyone else around you. Be honest, and do good work. If your honest about yourself, you do good work, are a good martial artist and a good instructor, and can prove yourself when needed, then titles or legitimacy will take care of itself.

Sorry for the long post.

I hope that I explained everything...

Paul
Good post and I did not mean to put you on the spot and especially glad you did not take offense because I am trying to be genuine with my martial brothers and sisters.

But your signature that caught my eye was this one.

The Highest Caliber of Private Close-Quarters Defense Instruction...

Thats what I was asking you. Your opinion comparing that type of claim vs. a master claim. Could there be a connection as far what people claim, whether it's rank related or just abilities that imply greatness. I'm sure that you're Martial Talk signature has nothing to do with how you do buisness. It just caught my eye while discussing claims. Thats all, nothing more.

I know your qualifications because I am aware of Modern Arnis standards so there is no questioning there. :asian:

[Cruentus]

Good post and I did not mean to put you on the spot and especially glad you did not take offense because I am trying to be genuine with my martial brothers and sisters.

But your signature that caught my eye was this one.

The Highest Caliber of Private Close-Quarters Defense Instruction...

Thats what I was asking you. Your opinion comparing that type of claim vs. a master claim. Could there be a connection as far what people claim, whether it's rank related or just abilities that imply greatness. I'm sure that you're Martial Talk signature has nothing to do with how you do buisness. It just caught my eye while discussing claims. Thats all, nothing more.

I know your qualifications because I am aware of Modern Arnis standards so there is no questioning there. :asian:

Ah...thank you sir. Sorry I misunderstood, I didn't realize you were refering to my little tag line.

Well, sure, my tag line may be a little, how could I say this, "swelled." So, I agree. Yet, many advertisements, slogans, and tag lines are. The question is if these are ethical or not.

Is Hydroxycuts really the "next step in the evolution of weightloss," or is Fidelity investments really the "smart move," or does Lexus really allow you to "take a luxurious lifestyle with you;" well you get the idea.

Tag lines or slogans are really just opinions. Obviously Fidelity is of the opinion that going to them would be the "smart move," where as I am sure they have plenty of former clients who might think differently. What makes it ethical or unethical is what is behind the tag line. If Fidelity is not trying to misrepresent themselves or act dishonestly, and if they are doing all they can to make their product "the smart move," then that is what is makes their tag line within the realm of business ethics.

As to my tag line, I am striving to offer the highest caliber of private close quarters defense instruction. Whether I can offer that or not is a matter of opinion, in which some will say yay, and others nay. Honestly, some are of the opinion that they have gotten the best instruction for their needs at the time from me. They aren't and weren't interested if someone else might be more expierienced or higher ranked or better then me in some way; they were interested in a private program tailored to fit their needs and objectives for a price. By being able to deliver such a program that accomplished their objectives, to them they feel that it was the highest caliber of instruction for the money, time, and effort that they were willing to put out. And, I won't argue with them there.

So, I am not trying to misrepresent myself with my tag line, as I realize and want others to realize that how high caliber my programs are is a matter of opinion, and some few share (and more may share in the future) the opinion of the tag line.

This does not mean, by the way, that I think I am the best martial artist or tactical instructor ever to waqlk the planet. The reality is that I have a lot to learn and there are a lot of folks out there with more experience then me. However, I do feel that many of my programs are competable with the best. This doesn't mean that I am the best, it just means that the program competes well. Example, I teach an Every Day Carry civilian knife seminar that in about 4 to 5 hours gives a person what they need to know about the basics of carrying a knife, and using one for self-defense. I would put this program up against anything else that is out there trying to fullfill the same objective within the same amount of time. This does not mean that I am the best guy out there. Instructor A, B, and C may have better knife skills then me, for instance. But, if they are designing a 4-5 hour program to fullfill the same objectives, I'll bet that my program will compete well with theirs.

Who's program is "better" at that point really will be up to the client. One program may suit one person better, and another program may be better for someone else.

Anyways, that all cleared up, I am probably getting into too lengthy of an explaination here. The pointI am getting at is that a tag line usually is an opinion, really. It will be up to the consumer to decide if they share that opinion. A title or rank on the other hand is not a matter opinion; what title one goes by and what rank one is, and how they obtained these are facts. What matters is whether or not one is honest about the facts, and whether or not the facts themselves are dubious.

Bottom line is it boils down to honesty and ethical behavior. If one has these, then all is well.

Side note: My efforts with my company are very new. Tulisan Tactical Training is in the process of defining itself, and presenting things in a marketable and coherent fashion. I don't propose to be even close to knowing everything on this, nor will I ever. This is one big and exciting learning process for me. With this process, however, mistakes are going to be made, as this is how one learns. A lot of people try to hide and cover up mistakes for fear of bad "PR," and this is where I think many people get tripped up. If what one has to offer is good and can stand on its own, then there is no need to feint perfection or hide mistakes. Therefore, I hide nothing, and put it all out there. I want to see the reaction and responses I get and I want to here opinions on my efforts in both marketing and instruction, as this will allow me to continually improve. So, I appreciate opinions that are constructive. As to my tag line, this conversation has caused me to rethink it to tweak it a little, as I think that it may be too "swelled" for my liking. So I do truely enjoy constructive conversations like this, even if I am put "on the spot" a bit.

Thanks again,

Paul

[Rich Parsons]

Personally on the master issue I think it should come from your master instructor or higher.

With in your art or organization your official title should come from your higher ups, in particular if you are studying a traditional art where you this type of title and rank are part of your system.

:asian:

[Rich Parsons]

Hey There,


An interesting thing about Master is where the word originates and how it comes into our everyday understanding. Linguistically it comes from the latin word "magister". In classical and medieval latin it generally meant "teacher" or "one who is adept". Languages influenced by latin such as the romance languages, the slavic languages, and the germanic languages inherited a great number of variations: "maestro", "maestre", "master", "mister", "magistrate", "maître". They all however tend to mean the same sort of thing: "a learned teacher, adept at something, and who generally is in charge". The terms "sensei", "sifu", and "guru" all signify the same sort of meaning as "master". But even then the translation is imperfect because each of these terms carries different significance in the originating languages.

Within our separate arts these general terms come to have special meaning. In general they carry a different meaning than in the internal jargon of our styles. Titles that mean something special in one group may be thought ridiculous or offensive in another or may be unintelligible in the great mass of commonspeak. In Britain the American peace symbol (index and middle held up) is the same as the American bird (middle finger). Imagine the kind of confusion that can cause at a rock concert or soccer match. Misunderstanding is rampant when people fail to recognize that the other side of an argument may not be speaking the same language.



Another example: In Germany the Ok symbol is calling someone a seven letter word for your rear end. Cultures are different and understanding them is good. One cannot assume or presume that it is the same all over and everywhere. This is the number one error that US Tourists make while traveling. They assume the food and language and money and clothes will all be the same. It is not, it is a different culture with a different history with different understandings and meanings.

Peace

:asian:

[Flying Crane]

I'm not sure why everyone is so interested in having titles like Master and Grand Master, and Great Grandmaster and Professor and O-Sensei, etc. These imply perfection, or near perfection in martial practice, a claim that I feel few if any people can really backup. Some organizations attach titles with certain ranks, some people acquire titles by being recognized by others, some people acquire titles by group self-promoting, and some people simply give themselves the title.

Personally, I think claiming very high rank and titles simply puts you up for a lot of potential scrutiny, ridicule, and even challenges. Not something I would relish. These titles may have meant something in the past, but I think in about 99% of the cases now, it is used for promotional purposes, to attract students. After all, would you train with the 3rd Degree Black Belt, or the 8th degree Master Professor who runs the school down the street? There is no guarantee that the the 8th degree isn't gonna be lousy, and the 3rd degree is really top notch. But these guys prey on the ignorance and gullibility of the public.

I would like to see people stick with titles like Sensei, Sifu, Teacher, Instructor, etc., and discard the high titles that go along with the inflated egos.

[arnisador]

Hear, hear!

[searcher]

Very well put Flying Crane!!!!!

[Sapper6]

I'm not sure why everyone is so interested in having titles like Master and Grand Master, and Great Grandmaster and Professor and O-Sensei, etc. These imply perfection, or near perfection in martial practice, a claim that I feel few if any people can really backup. Some organizations attach titles with certain ranks, some people acquire titles by being recognized by others, some people acquire titles by group self-promoting, and some people simply give themselves the title.

Personally, I think claiming very high rank and titles simply puts you up for a lot of potential scrutiny, ridicule, and even challenges. Not something I would relish. These titles may have meant something in the past, but I think in about 99% of the cases now, it is used for promotional purposes, to attract students. After all, would you train with the 3rd Degree Black Belt, or the 8th degree Master Professor who runs the school down the street? There is no guarantee that the the 8th degree isn't gonna be lousy, and the 3rd degree is really top notch. But these guys prey on the ignorance and gullibility of the public.

I would like to see people stick with titles like Sensei, Sifu, Teacher, Instructor, etc., and discard the high titles that go along with the inflated egos.

very well said! i agree 100% :)

[tradrockrat]

Often it happens through flying.

Basically what you do is get on a plane in one place as a black belt, then when you land you are a Grandmaster. Ask about it at the airport.

THAT is TFF!!!!!!!!!:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Navarre]

Each system is going to have its own approach. I have Master ranking in one system at 4th degree but have the same rank in another system where I am not even called Sensei because I do not teach my own class. Most arts consider one a sensei at black belt level because we are "teachers" whether we have a specific class or not.

Neither title means a great deal to me. I am fully aware of what I went through in each system to achieve it, what I am capable of doing with or without the title, and what I feel I have to offer those around me.

I spend more of my attention focusing on what I can learn from others, from white belt on up to Grandmaster. When I got my first black belt ranking (just over 14 years ago now) my sensei looked me dead in the eye, shook my hand, and said with complete sincerity, "Congratulations. Now you are an *advanced* beginner."

[Flying Crane]

When I got my first black belt ranking (just over 14 years ago now) my sensei looked me dead in the eye, shook my hand, and said with complete sincerity, "Congratulations. Now you are an *advanced* beginner."
That's about what I was told as well.

[searcher]

When I got my first black belt ranking (just over 14 years ago now) my sensei looked me dead in the eye, shook my hand, and said with complete sincerity, "Congratulations. Now you are an *advanced* beginner."
This is a very good point. Most of the general public and many martial artists have the idea that being a BB is the same as being a master. That you are a lethal weapon or the like. Most don't understand that the only thing you have truly mastered are the basics. I am sure some will disagree with my view on this.

I heard it said one time by a guy I heavily respect that, " I have only one master and He is The Creator of Heaven and Earth."

[Navarre]

And I've found that to hold true every day. As my tag line says "Perception is Reality". I am aware of what I can do and have intrinsic belief in my abilities but I keep myself humble with his one simple statement. I keep it firmly in mind every time I feel the urge to count the stripes on my belt.

[Grenadier]

Different strokes for different folks. What holds true for one style may not necessarily be the same for another. For this discussion, I'll limit my contribution to the Japanese and Okinawan styles.

In general, all black belts hold a dan ranking. Holding a dan ranking, though, does not necessarily imply any particular level of mastery, only that the rank holder has attained a sufficient mastery of the basic fundamentals, and is capable of learning the more advanced techniques.

There are instructor ranks of all sorts. In general, a full fledged sensei, loosely translated to "one who has gone before," usually holds a 3rd dan ranking, or higher. Just because one has a 3rd dan ranking, though, does not automatically make him a sensei.

There can be instructor ranks below sensei. Sometimes such lower ranked (usually 1st or 2nd dan) instructors are sometimes called ko-sensei, or sempai, depending on the style. Even if one has a ko-sensei title, it's not unsual to call him just plain ol' "sensei" at times, or if a more senior instructor is addressing him, he may be called "ko-sensei."

There can be instructor ranks above sensei as well. The most common is known as "shihan," which is translated as "teacher of teachers." Where does that sensei to shihan rank border lie? That's not easy to answer, since some styles might make several eligible to become a shihan at 5th dan, while others might only give that title to the top person in the style.

Thus, very loosely speaking, the pecking order, from low to high would be:

Sempai / Ko-sensei
Sensei
Shihan

Remember, some styles might not even bother with a Sempai / Ko-sensei classification, and that there are certainly 1st dan sensei around. This does not imply anything at all, regarding the instructor's skill.


There are other honorary titles used for the more advanced sensei / shihan of a style. These are loosely classified as follows (please note, my definitions need not be the same as anyone else's), assuming that judan is the top rank:

Tachi: For instructors who are considered mid-level within a style. Usually 3rd or 4th dan.

Renshi: An more highly advanced instructor. Usually a 5th or 6th dan, and has demonstrated leadership and achievement within the style.

Kyoshi: A master instructor. Usually 7th or 8th dan, and has gone above and beyond what he already has done as a Renshi.

Hanshi: Professor equivalent. Usually a 9th or 10th dan. Some styles will only have one Hanshi within their system, others may have more.

It's also noted that some styles go from Renshi to Hanshi, skipping the Kyoshi level, and that other styles might have different rank requirements for the titles. For example, in certain Jiu-Jitsu styles, there are 4th dan Renshi, and 8th dan Hanshi. It's all simply a matter of the style's system.

[Navarre]

Yes, it is all completely relevant to the system. And, in that fact, essentially has no true relevance.

Call me ko-sensei in one of my styles, sensei in the other, and even shihan in my other system. I hold all three titles and it makes no difference. I am a unique individual with unique talents and limitations.

I can only offer all that I am and accept all I am willing to learn. Everything else is just a label.

[Brother John]

titles are OK....
but they only take you so far. Then, when you move or when you talk... those who "know" will Know You.
A master is often given that title when they achieve a certain rank.
For me?
It's when they are an authority in their art, with real knowledge/skill/insights and many many experiences. It's evident in everything they do.
Most often, these people don't need for me to READ their title or be told, I can just tell.
Sometimes the reverse is true: I'll read or hear their title.... then see them move or hear them speak, and know that it's nothing more than a word prefixing their given name.


The title I like best?
Martial Artist.
I'd just like to be able to live up to that!!

Your Brother
John

[Navarre]

The title I like best?
Martial Artist.
I'd just like to be able to live up to that!!
I think you just made a good statement toward showing that you already do, John.

[Drac]

Often it happens through flying

I read that it happens when flying over Japan or Korea..

[Fluffy]

For my group (Hwa-rang Taekwondo Federation - HTF)
4th Degree is Senior Instructor
5th Degree is Master
6th Degree is Sr. Master
7th Degree is Chief Master
8th Degree is Grandmaster
9th Degree is Grandmaster

Master Fluffy

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

This has got to be the silliest thread I've seen all year.

A "Master" is someone who's ego is so much bigger than all the other Black Belt's around that he needs a new title so that everyone will know he has been around longer than them.

A "Grandmaster" is someone who's ego is so much bigger than all the other Masters around that he needs a new title so that everyone will know he has been around longer than them.

Instead of Master or Grandmaster, I think people should get descriptinve titles based on their experience and physical accomplishements. Therefore, the only titles I have earned are "Old" and "Fat'.

[jdinca]

This has got to be the silliest thread I've seen all year.

A "Master" is someone who's ego is so much bigger than all the other Black Belt's around that he needs a new title so that everyone will know he has been around longer than them.

A "Grandmaster" is someone who's ego is so much bigger than all the other Masters around that he needs a new title so that everyone will know he has been around longer than them.

Instead of Master or Grandmaster, I think people should get descriptinve titles based on their experience and physical accomplishements. Therefore, the only titles I have earned are "Old" and "Fat'.

Gotta respectfully disagree. You're making a blanket statement that makes it look like a Master or Grandmaster bestows the title upon themselves for the purpose of feeding their own ego. Although that may be true in some cases, in many it is determined by the system, organization, or tradition and is considered an honor and recognition of the individuals accomplishments/contributions in the field of MA.

Do I think the terms can be abused and overused? Yes but certainly not in the everybodies guilty fashion that you imply. You've been around long enough that I'm pretty certain you know the difference.

[Fluffy]

This has got to be the silliest thread I've seen all year.

A "Master" is someone who's ego is so much bigger than all the other Black Belt's around that he needs a new title so that everyone will know he has been around longer than them.

A "Grandmaster" is someone who's ego is so much bigger than all the other Masters around that he needs a new title so that everyone will know he has been around longer than them.

Instead of Master or Grandmaster, I think people should get descriptinve titles based on their experience and physical accomplishements. Therefore, the only titles I have earned are "Old" and "Fat'.

That's disrespectful. A Master, or Grandmaster, is someone who is has a certain ammout of knowlege and has recieved a certian rank inside an art or org. As said before a Master is an instructor of instructors. A Grandmaster is an instructor of Masters.

Are you trying to flame?

"Master" Fluffy

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

Of course I'm trying to flame. Master and Grandmaster are grossly overused terms. OK, so I'm out of line saying that many of these people pick their own title. Most have had underlings or "peers" bestow these titles. But my point remains true: the titltes are silly and exist only to feed egos.

[Rich Parsons]

This has got to be the silliest thread I've seen all year.

A "Master" is someone who's ego is so much bigger than all the other Black Belt's around that he needs a new title so that everyone will know he has been around longer than them.

A "Grandmaster" is someone who's ego is so much bigger than all the other Masters around that he needs a new title so that everyone will know he has been around longer than them.

Instead of Master or Grandmaster, I think people should get descriptinve titles based on their experience and physical accomplishements. Therefore, the only titles I have earned are "Old" and "Fat'.


OFK,

What if people call you said title, even if you ask them to just call you "Rich" in my case or by a simple name?

One has tried, but others do it out of respect or out of training from other systems.

Given this system, does this still make the person in question being called Master an egoist?

[Fluffy]

I dissagree, and not because I hold a master rank. The titles are used as a way we honor those who come before us. Like Sensai, Saboonim, or Kwan-in. Sure, are they overused a bit, there are many more Masters around now than 20 years ago. But I can tell you that the Masters and GM's I know all have earned the honor.

Master Fluffy

[jdinca]

Of course I'm trying to flame. Master and Grandmaster are grossly overused terms. OK, so I'm out of line saying that many of these people pick their own title. Most have had underlings or "peers" bestow these titles. But my point remains true: the titltes are silly and exist only to feed egos.

You seem a bit grumpy tonight.

If I'm not mistaken, these titles have been around for a long time and are a part of martial arts tradition. Just because they may be overused, doesn't mean they aren't appropriate for many who hold those titles. Your point is an opinion, open to disagreement, not an accepted fact.

I work in an industry that has a proud tradition surrounding rank. I'm very proud of mine, I worked damned hard to get it. Are there those who let their rank go to their heads? You betcha. But in no way does that cast a shadow on the vast majority who wear their rank with pride and are deserving of every bit of it. Martial Arts is no different.

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

OFK,

What if people call you said title, even if you ask them to just call you "Rich" in my case or by a simple name?

One has tried, but others do it out of respect or out of training from other systems.

Given this system, does this still make the person in question being called Master an egoist?

Yes Rich, I have renounced titles and prefer to be called "Alan". But, I will answer to "Hey Dude!"

[hongkongfooey]

This has got to be the silliest thread I've seen all year.

A "Master" is someone who's ego is so much bigger than all the other Black Belt's around that he needs a new title so that everyone will know he has been around longer than them.

A "Grandmaster" is someone who's ego is so much bigger than all the other Masters around that he needs a new title so that everyone will know he has been around longer than them.

Instead of Master or Grandmaster, I think people should get descriptinve titles based on their experience and physical accomplishements. Therefore, the only titles I have earned are "Old" and "Fat'.


I thinking something along the same lines.
My breakdown goes something like this.

A master paid someone to promote him from a 2nd dan to a 5th dan.

A grandmaster had the foresight to buy publishing software for his computer, to make the 10th dan certificate to go along with his red master's belt, in addition to joining for every sokeship board on the face of the earth.

HKF

[Sapper6]

the title game is not restricted to any specific art or system. all of them prefer to use them, and many choose to misuse them just the same.

to say the title thing is "ignorant and useless" is as ignorant as the person saying it. just because said person disagrees with the ideal of naming certain degrees of black belts doesn't make it wrong. but it's the misuse of the naming system that brings discredit to the idea.

following OFK's reasoning...anyone who's ever had an instructor use the title, master, senior professor, grandmaster, whatever...should call that instructor up and tell him he's an egotistical retard searching for self-proclaimed glory. i wouldn't suggest it...

[hongkongfooey]

But, what if that master received his title through a sokeship board or some other rank exchange scheme? There are so many 10th degrees out there today, they can't all be real.

HKF

[Sapper6]

But, what if that master received his title through a sokeship board or some other rank exchange scheme? There are so many 10th degrees out there today, they can't all be real.

HKF

i guess you need to research who you study under then, or try to know more of a person before you befriend or discredit them.

i once owned an acura integra that took a dive not long after i bought it. perhaps i could make the statement, "all foreign cars are peices of ****". would that be a fair assumption...?

[tshadowchaser]

A master paid someone to promote him from a 2nd dan to a 5th dan.



Not in all systems my ranks where one at a time and i did pay but in blood sweat and sometimes things that got broken. Practice knowledge and dedication to promotin the system through diligent hard work and training also where part of my price.

Now i do agree that the terms do not have the meaning in many systems that they had 30 or 40 years ago and that there are way to many people running around with titles and rank that they would nver have come close to getting back then. but that is how many systems have surrived by promoting people to higher rank to leave room beneath for students to get rank . If you only have a 6 dan system it is going to take so long for someone to reach 1st or 2nd to say nothing of the decades it will take to get 3d that the system will fade and die because people will go where they can see their progress marked by rank.

[hongkongfooey]

Not in all systems my ranks where one at a time and i did pay but in blood sweat and sometimes things that got broken. Practice knowledge and dedication to promotin the system through diligent hard work and training also where part of my price.

Now i do agree that the terms do not have the meaning in many systems that they had 30 or 40 years ago and that there are way to many people running around with titles and rank that they would nver have come close to getting back then. but that is how many systems have surrived by promoting people to higher rank to leave room beneath for students to get rank . If you only have a 6 dan system it is going to take so long for someone to reach 1st or 2nd to say nothing of the decades it will take to get 3d that the system will fade and die because people will go where they can see their progress marked by rank.


So true. I guess that I forget that sometimes, we have become a fastfood society.

HKF

[green meanie]

Not in all systems my ranks where one at a time and i did pay but in blood sweat and sometimes things that got broken. Practice knowledge and dedication to promotin the system through diligent hard work and training also where part of my price.

Now i do agree that the terms do not have the meaning in many systems that they had 30 or 40 years ago and that there are way to many people running around with titles and rank that they would nver have come close to getting back then. but that is how many systems have surrived by promoting people to higher rank to leave room beneath for students to get rank . If you only have a 6 dan system it is going to take so long for someone to reach 1st or 2nd to say nothing of the decades it will take to get 3d that the system will fade and die because people will go where they can see their progress marked by rank.

I agree and I think this does bring up a very good point. But, on the other hand.... (just to play the devil for a moment) maybe we wouldn't need advanced titles like master, grand master, and supreme grand master and being 'just' being a black belt would be enough and would still mean something if it was being given away so easily.

[jdinca]

I thinking something along the same lines.
My breakdown goes something like this.

A master paid someone to promote him from a 2nd dan to a 5th dan.

A grandmaster had the foresight to buy publishing software for his computer, to make the 10th dan certificate to go along with his red master's belt, in addition to joining for every sokeship board on the face of the earth.

HKF

Wow. You and I are in completely different martial arts worlds. You need to quit reading the DVD adds in IKF. :eek:

[jdinca]

I agree and I think this does bring up a very good point. But, on the other hand.... (just to play the devil for a moment) maybe we wouldn't need advanced titles like master, grand master, and supreme grand master and being 'just' being a black belt would be enough and would still mean something if it was being given away so easily.

Should we stop there? Or should we extend it to belt ranks to. How's about white, brown and black. No need for all those silly colors and degrees of black. Oh yeah, that's the way it was done before MA came to this country. :boing1:

[Fluffy]

Better yet, just give everyone a white belt........given 10-20 years it will turn black.....or a dark shade of brown anyway.

No, I'm only running the system that was handed down to me. Will I make some changes for my students? Already have......I allow 3-6 y/o'ds to test for higher levels of white belt. At 7 they may start at the regular levels. My students who become masters will probably fiddle with ut all as well.......that's how we make things better.

-Fluff

[green meanie]

Should we stop there? Or should we extend it to belt ranks to. How's about white, brown and black. No need for all those silly colors and degrees of black. Oh yeah, that's the way it was done before MA came to this country. :boing1:

Not a bad idea. White - green - brown - black are the only colors I use in my adult class. It's been working just fine for us. :)

[jdinca]

Not a bad idea. White - green - brown - black are the only colors I use in my adult class. It's been working just fine for us. :)

We actually use an extensive belt system. white - yellow - orange - orange II - purple - purple II - blue - green - 3 degrees of brown - black. As a green belt, I considered myself "King of the White Belts"! :)

Orange and Purple were split because we found we were losing students because those belts were taking so long to get through. As much as I hate to say it, all those colors make a difference in student motivation, retention.

Once at the instructor level, belt is de-emphasized and the journey and the goal of BB is emphasized. It has its own motivational qualities.

[green meanie]

We actually use an extensive belt system. white - yellow - orange - orange II - purple - purple II - blue - green - 3 degrees of brown - black. As a green belt, I considered myself "King of the White Belts"! :)

Orange and Purple were split because we found we were losing students because those belts were taking so long to get through. As much as I hate to say it, all those colors make a difference in student motivation, retention.

Once at the instructor level, belt is de-emphasized and the journey and the goal of BB is emphasized. It has its own motivational qualities.

I understand. Let me just add that the reason I do it the way I do is BECAUSE I CAN. I can appreciate the fact that you want and need to pass this on the way it was passed on to you. I'm not trying to find fault with that or belittle it in any way.

[jdinca]

I understand. Let me just add that the reason I do it the way I do is BECAUSE I CAN. I can appreciate the fact that you want and need to pass this on the way it was passed on to you. I'm not trying to find fault with that or belittle it in any way.

Not taking it that way at all. What you do makes sense. :)

[jujutsu_indonesia]

At what point does a black belt become a "Master" and when does a Master become a "Grand Master"?

Let me try to answer these. If my answer become a stupid ramble I apologize..

in the Dentokan system, the black belt levels aren't really master levels at all. To earn your black belt, you have to learn and be proficient at the Shodan-gi set of techniques (about 20++ techniques), then to earn 2nd degree black you have to learn the Nidan-gi, for 3rd Black you learn Sandan-gi, and for 4th black you learn Yondan-gi. So even a 4th Dan black is still considered as student level :)

After 4th Dan, you can take the "instructorship" level or the "shihan-gi", and if you pass this, you will get the teaching license called "shihan menkyo" which basically means "master instructor". So, no, you are not a Master in the sense that your student are your slaves. You are a "master instructor" never separate the master part from the instructor part. You are an instructor whom are authorized to teach advanced techniques ("master class"), hence, you are "master instructor". :)

After the "shihan menkyo" if you are so addicted to the Hakko-ryu of Dentokan, you will be allowed to learn the "menkyo kaiden" level, which is the rest of the teachings. Kaiden basically means "all transmissions", so after completing this, you have learn everything there is to learn from this school. Thus you are a "menkyo kaidensha" which roughly means "graduate".

No, you don't get grandmasterships here :) However it's a common practice to call the teacher of the "master instructors" as "grand master", which basically means "he is the teacher of us all". In our group, this can be used to refer to Mr. Roy Hobbs because he is the teacher of all of our teachers. However he never use that title so we refer to him as simply "Hobbs sensei". :)

My teacher Ben Haryo (who studied under Mr. Hobbs) also studied Wado-ryu under Mr. Taman. So when Mr. Haryo use the word "grandmaster" or "GM" he refer to Mr. Otsuka Jiro, the son of Wado-ryu founder Mr. Otsuka Hironori. Mr. Otsuka Jiro is the "grandmaster" because his father has chosen him as the grandmaster and successor of the Wado-ryu. Even though my teacher is now under an organization which broken away from Mr. Otsuka Jiro, he still out of respect refer to Mr. Jiro as the grandmaster.

Och I am rambling again! Sorry! must be too much eating American steak!

[jsdduke]

I suppose at the end of the day martial arts is not about Rank,but the process of daily training and self discovery. Some of us will never be considered Masters or Grand Masters,but the path taken is still an enjoyment and isn't that what it's all about? Only those who KNOW can recognize and determine Greatness (Your Peers). Labels are given by others to recognize your true Mastery.To proclaim it yourself is called having a big ego. Maybe I'm wrong,but just a thought.

[Fluffy]

I suppose at the end of the day martial arts is not about Rank,but the process of daily training and self discovery. Some of us will never be considered Masters or Grand Masters,but the path taken is still an enjoyment and isn't that what it's all about? Only those who KNOW can recognize and determine Greatness (Your Peers). Labels are given by others to recognize your true Mastery.To proclaim it yourself is called having a big ego. Maybe I'm wrong,but just a thought.

Hear Hear! Good post!

[green meanie]

Hear Hear! Good post!

Seconded. Welcome aboard! :)

[jdinca]

I suppose at the end of the day martial arts is not about Rank,but the process of daily training and self discovery. Some of us will never be considered Masters or Grand Masters,but the path taken is still an enjoyment and isn't that what it's all about? Only those who KNOW can recognize and determine Greatness (Your Peers). Labels are given by others to recognize your true Mastery.To proclaim it yourself is called having a big ego. Maybe I'm wrong,but just a thought.

Nicely put!

[Kacey]

I suppose at the end of the day martial arts is not about Rank,but the process of daily training and self discovery. Some of us will never be considered Masters or Grand Masters,but the path taken is still an enjoyment and isn't that what it's all about? Only those who KNOW can recognize and determine Greatness (Your Peers). Labels are given by others to recognize your true Mastery.To proclaim it yourself is called having a big ego. Maybe I'm wrong,but just a thought.

Very well put. There will always be someone bigger, stronger, faster, taller, better trained, higher rank - whatever distinction one cares to make. When I started TKD, I never expected to get past white belt... it was something I tried to because the guy I was dating talked me into it. Every day, I learn something new - from my sahbum, my peers, and, most especially, my students.

For various reasons, mostly involving graduate school, I didn't test for 7 years, but it didn't stop me from working out, instructing, and generally staying involved in my art. The people I have known in the past who attached significant importance to their own rank are, largely, in one of two places relative to their art: a) they have quit OR b) they are in an organization that promotes for reasons other than proficiency (to gain loyalty, because enough money has been paid, because s/he's been there long enough, etc.). I am more impressed by one of my students, who came from an independent organization and didn't test for years and continued to learn and train, because that's what he wanted to do (he started 18 years ago, and only tested for his I Dan about a 1-1/2 years ago, mostly due to the lack of someone of senior enough to test him) than I am with many higher-ranked black belts I have met.

A belt is a piece of died cotton - true rank is conferred by the respect of those around you.