FlamingJulian
Blue Belt
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2016
- Messages
- 267
- Reaction score
- 23
Serious question: I'm assuming they would know fundamentals better and maybe a few more kicks. But some people say they only know impractical stuff. ?!?!
What makes a Grandmaster better than a 6th degree black belt Master?
- Thread starter FlamingJulian
- Start date
Well, one has a longer name. Just like in anime, where longer hair is indicative of superior strength, so too is a longer title indicative of a stronger blackbelt.
...or it might not matter. Let them both show you what they can do, and you decide which of them is superior. Then watch a class (...it might be a seminar at this point) and see which is the better teacher.
You can't judge people based on their rank
Some of them will be doing 'impractical' stuff, others will have earned it through blood sweat and tears.
...or it might not matter. Let them both show you what they can do, and you decide which of them is superior. Then watch a class (...it might be a seminar at this point) and see which is the better teacher.
You can't judge people based on their rank
Some of them will be doing 'impractical' stuff, others will have earned it through blood sweat and tears.
OP
FlamingJulian
Blue Belt
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2016
- Messages
- 267
- Reaction score
- 23
- Thread Starter
- #3
Well, one has a longer name. Just like in anime, where longer hair is indicative of superior strength, so too is a longer title indicative of a stronger blackbelt.
...or it might not matter. Let them both show you what they can do, and you decide which of them is superior. Then watch a class (...it might be a seminar at this point) and see which is the better teacher.
You can't judge people based on their rank
Some of them will be doing 'impractical' stuff, others will have earned it through blood sweat and tears.
Well I'm already in a class. I've been to 3 classes. 1 with a Grandmaster and 2 with Masters. In my opinion they all look good. I've been training for years and am getting my black belt soon and I don't see a huge difference
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
...So if you are bald, you need a longer title, or at least some kind of aura or something. Or a lot of tails. I've noticed that more tails make you more powerful. So the best would be a very long haired great grandmaster with nine tails and an awesome aura. Multiple arms and legs like some representations of Hindu deities would be even better.
RTKDCMB
Senior Master
But probably not unprecedented.
Headhunter
Senior Master
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2016
- Messages
- 4,765
- Reaction score
- 1,598
From what I've seen when they say contributions they mean how much cash they put in their organisations pocket
MI_martialist
Brown Belt
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2016
- Messages
- 401
- Reaction score
- 44
The real question is...what do the terms "master" and "grandmaster" really mean?
JR 137
Grandmaster
Every organization has different standards. I'll go with the differences between a 6th dan and say, an 8th dan in a respectable organization...
The difference is typically experience. The 8th dan is probably that 6th dan's teacher, his teacher's teacher, etc. The 8th dan has taught more people, promoted more people, has more higher quality and/or higher ranking students he's taught, etc. He may have written more books and articles, taught more seminars, stuff like that. Things like this hopefully aren't done for his advancement in rank, but for promoting and spreading the art, and for spreading quality knowledge of the art.
Will an 8th dan always be a better teacher than a 3rd or 4th dan? Nope. The 8th dan will have more experience and knowledge, but that doesn't automatically make him a better teacher. The 3rd dan may be a better teacher because he relates to you personally better. He may not have the depth of knowledge nor the depth of experience the 8th dan has, but the 3rd dan has far more knowledge that his brown belt student needs at that rank.
I've seen tons of videos of great masters of karate doing kata. Most of them are in their 80s. Are their performances as "good" as a guy half their their age and rank? Honestly, no. Not as powerful, fluid, sharp, etc. If a guy in his 30s did the same kata the same exact way step for step and technique for technique, no one would pay much attention. Actually, he'd probably get criticized. But there's more to it than what it looks like, even adjusted for the age gap.
A grandmaster is well past his physical prime. He's not a grandmaster because he can kick higher, punch harder, or do anything faster nor prettier than someone or anyone below his rank. He's a grandmaster because he's "been there, done that." And so have his students.
The difference is typically experience. The 8th dan is probably that 6th dan's teacher, his teacher's teacher, etc. The 8th dan has taught more people, promoted more people, has more higher quality and/or higher ranking students he's taught, etc. He may have written more books and articles, taught more seminars, stuff like that. Things like this hopefully aren't done for his advancement in rank, but for promoting and spreading the art, and for spreading quality knowledge of the art.
Will an 8th dan always be a better teacher than a 3rd or 4th dan? Nope. The 8th dan will have more experience and knowledge, but that doesn't automatically make him a better teacher. The 3rd dan may be a better teacher because he relates to you personally better. He may not have the depth of knowledge nor the depth of experience the 8th dan has, but the 3rd dan has far more knowledge that his brown belt student needs at that rank.
I've seen tons of videos of great masters of karate doing kata. Most of them are in their 80s. Are their performances as "good" as a guy half their their age and rank? Honestly, no. Not as powerful, fluid, sharp, etc. If a guy in his 30s did the same kata the same exact way step for step and technique for technique, no one would pay much attention. Actually, he'd probably get criticized. But there's more to it than what it looks like, even adjusted for the age gap.
A grandmaster is well past his physical prime. He's not a grandmaster because he can kick higher, punch harder, or do anything faster nor prettier than someone or anyone below his rank. He's a grandmaster because he's "been there, done that." And so have his students.
OP
FlamingJulian
Blue Belt
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2016
- Messages
- 267
- Reaction score
- 23
- Thread Starter
- #11
MI_martialist
Brown Belt
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2016
- Messages
- 401
- Reaction score
- 44
It seems that you are confusing or mixing up a "dan" ranking and a title...what does Master and Grand Master mean?
If we assume GM is a higher rank (we don't have that designation, so I'm assuming), it may or may not be any indication of skill. Let's assume both ranks are fairly earned. In most associations I've seen, the top few ranks are not technical ranks (meaning they're not awarded for skill at the art), but are ranks of hierarchy awarded to those who have accomplished something significant within the art or who have contributed much to the art (so, for instance, an instructor who has generated many good instructors under her may earn a higher rank than an equally skilled instructor who doesn't generate many new instructors, or whose instructors aren't as high-quality).
Thus, the higher rank may simply mean they've done more for the art. Or it may mean they are better at teaching instructors. Or it may mean they've been around long enough and maintained high enough standards that they've earned that level of respect.
Or, as others have said, it may mean nothing, at all.
A couple of thoughts on this. Firstly, as in my previous post, there may be little or no technical difference. There may or may not be a deeper understanding. Secondly, there may be a difference that you don't yet detect. Even after several years of training, there are still subtleties you won't see yet. I see much more now than I did 15 years ago (when I had more than a decade of training in this art).
That depends upon the organization.
Martialist... reference to the old blog/mail? Are they still up and running?
IMO, a master is someone who has a deep understanding of the art they're involved in. The only way i can make a solid example of this is Kendo.
I expect Kendo blackbelts, especially high dans, to fight in a VERY different way to a beginner, or intermediate student. Not just because of refined technique, but also refined strategy, tactics, tricks, reflexes, etc etc etc. 2nd to that would be teaching ability - Some allowances have to be made for someone who has a deep understanding of something without necessarily being able to do it very well. For this, i refer to a coach.
But that's just what i think a master should be.
They designate a rank, that is all. They would be similar to the usage of Sensei and Shihan in some Japanese arts (where Shihan is often used only with 5th dan and above).
Not necessarily. In many associations, the titles match up to certain dan ranks.
oftheherd1
Senior Master
- Joined
- May 12, 2011
- Messages
- 4,685
- Reaction score
- 817
I think titles are individual to the particular organization. They get to set the level at which one is a master or a grand master. They also get to set the criteria for knowledge one should have to attain those levels. That is where one should go to get the OP's question answered.
One thing I have observed is that even if a grand master is "past his prime," he probably is more effective, even if not so fast, unless he has some physical infirmity. That was the case with my grandmaster. Nobody in his right mind would have taken him on, and that was in his 70s and with arthritis, if they knew him. Yet he was always willing to teach and answer questions, and had an uncanny ability to keep track of all students in a large class, and spot incorrect applications and correct them. He was also one of the most polite people you could meet. Unless you insulted him or his art. Then you would get a lecture, or other appropriate form of instruction.
One thing I have observed is that even if a grand master is "past his prime," he probably is more effective, even if not so fast, unless he has some physical infirmity. That was the case with my grandmaster. Nobody in his right mind would have taken him on, and that was in his 70s and with arthritis, if they knew him. Yet he was always willing to teach and answer questions, and had an uncanny ability to keep track of all students in a large class, and spot incorrect applications and correct them. He was also one of the most polite people you could meet. Unless you insulted him or his art. Then you would get a lecture, or other appropriate form of instruction.
I was thinking about work, as getting people into the art, opening schools, making it known in the region / worldwide... If it is also about money I don't know. It must be the people with multiple fake Dan...
I met 3 sh** supermasters with sh**y classes with +6 Dan each, all in Paris. But they published books and DVDs and did TV demonstrations and it must be the better reasons... Up to decades teaching the same art.
