Determining Seniority....

[Bob Hubbard]

So, how do you determine seniority?

I was over at Tim Hartmans today and one of the topics that came up is seniority in the arts.

From the various discussions I've seen, it seems there are only a few ways to decide this:
- Time in that art
- Time in all arts
- date of black belt rank in that art
- date of first black belt in any art.

So, would I (last rank blue, haven't trained since summer 2005) who started in 2001 be senior to someone who started after me but who is now a black belt? Is my wife (who has trained longer than I and holds a BB in kenpo) my senior even though I started Arnis before her and received my blue before she did?

Whatta y'all think about all this?

 

[Big Don]

The way we do it is:
Rank in Kenpo
Time at that rank
For two or more testing for the same rank at the same time, Age.
The rest doesn't matter.

 

[K831]

Fighting ability

Character

 

[Telfer]

Historically, in many traditions seniority was determined by duels...not for personal reasons but as 'a comparison of technique'.

But aside from that, it was also determined by the degree to which a man could no longer be pulled around by his ego....either with praise or blame.

 

[xJOHNx]

In only compare within systems for seniority.
Comparing between two different arts (and different colour uses) is like comparing an apple to a banana. Both are fruits, but which one is better?

 

[wade]

Should not have got involved, sorry.

 

[jks9199]

It's not always easy... Where does a green belt who has trained sporadically for 20 or more years rank compared to green belts with less time? What about ranks across systems? How do you compare a Bujinkan green belt against other systems?

Generally, a higher rank is always more senior than a lower rank -- no matter how long they've been training. Beyond that, balance time & relative skill/knowledge.

And -- if it's so you can figure out where to line up -- make life easy. Line up lower and be evlevated if appropriate to the host.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Wade,
No issues between her and I on this one, I just used her and I as examples. I know she's the boss, lol!

Also, not asking about who out ranks who. It's a question of who is the "senior" in the equation, not the higher rank.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Let me put it this way.

Person A has a 4th Dan in karate. Trained for 40 years. 1st blackbelt was in TKD 35 yrs ago. 1st dan in Karate was 19 years ago.
Person B has a 6th Dan in karate. Trained 20 years. 1st blackbelt was in karate 20 years ago. 1st Dan Karate was 20 years ago.

B outranks A.
But who is the senior martial artist?

A has trained longer overall, but has less time in karate than B.

 

[wade]

Bob, cancelled.

 

[wade]

once again

 

[Archangel M]

Martial Arts rank cant be equated to military rank IMO. Martial Arts rank, as I see it, denotes "what you know". Military rank has to do with authority and pay. Two very different animals.

I think we get into trouble when we start using martial arts rank as an ego booster ("I deserve respect") or as some sort of "I can tell you what to do" marker.

I didn't "enlist" in the martial arts.

 

[Archangel M]

Let me put it this way.

Person A has a 4th Dan in karate. Trained for 40 years. 1st blackbelt was in TKD 35 yrs ago. 1st dan in Karate was 19 years ago.
Person B has a 6th Dan in karate. Trained 20 years. 1st blackbelt was in karate 20 years ago. 1st Dan Karate was 20 years ago.

B outranks A.
But who is the senior martial artist?

A has trained longer overall, but has less time in karate than B.

Not being flip .I swear. But why and where would it matter?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

The question came up in a discussion involving respect, seniority, etc.

My personal take on it all is, ranks outside of the art and often even the organization they were issued in are meaningless as all the requirements are different. There's no "minimum competency requirements" like in academic circles.

I also think "time in" is meaningless, as while a year is a year, 1 person might train weekends, another daily, another when they get around to it.

I've always thought that it's what you show that matters, not what hangs on your wall or waist. My views often been in the minority though, and I do know some folks who literally can't sit down for a dinner without checking to see who's cert was signed when in order to decide the seating arrangement. :rofl:

 

[Archangel M]

I think that getting too deep into "respect" issues inside a dojo is a recipe for trouble. IMO I'd prefer a "coach" to a "master". I respect a coach for what he knows, what he can teach me, and who he IS, not because "it's due him". I also don't have to bow and scrape and act all subservient with a "coach". I really "respect" him and that's enough.

This stuff reminds me of working details in the military and having to remember who the most senior ranking person in the room was so that I could yell "AT EASE!" at the right time and God help you if were mistaken. That's part of being in the military or in LE and I accept that. I don't believe in that sort of BS on the civilian side. I think its somewhat silly and artificial.

Not that that is what goes on in most dojos, but I think it does happen in far too many. Lets start with mutual respect and not worry about who is due what. I think that the person offended by the lack of respect is equal in "issues" to the person who refuses to show respect.

That's MY viewpoint.

This rank thing is at the root of a LOT of woes IMO.

 

[Carol]

I don't determine who is senior. I only concern myself with who is worth my time. Simple, really... :lol:

 

[Sukerkin]

In terms of the etiquette of the dojo, which is really what this is about at it's core, it is just the same as the military i.e. what rank and 'date of commission'. Everything else is moot.

There can be a few wrinkles in that pristine cloth of course and people can sometimes get too caught up (as we've discussed before) in tangling/mangling 'respect' and 'subservience' but there is no need to complicate matters more than that.

Of course, in some circumstances it can be more important to determine rank precidence but then we're straying into the area of 'politics' rather than decorum.

 

[xJOHNx]

The question came up in a discussion involving respect, seniority, etc.

My personal take on it all is, ranks outside of the art and often even the organization they were issued in are meaningless as all the requirements are different. There's no "minimum competency requirements" like in academic circles.

I also think "time in" is meaningless, as while a year is a year, 1 person might train weekends, another daily, another when they get around to it.

I've always thought that it's what you show that matters, not what hangs on your wall or waist. My views often been in the minority though, and I do know some folks who literally can't sit down for a dinner without checking to see who's cert was signed when in order to decide the seating arrangement. :rofl:

Hehe, that's easy to answer. Give everyone the same amount of respect.
From the guy in the sweatpant, to the guy who looks like a christmas tree because of all his seniority badges.

Furthermore, I completely agree with you. It's what is inside that counts.

 

[Bruno@MT]

Generally, a higher rank is always more senior than a lower rank -- no matter how long they've been training. Beyond that, balance time & relative skill/knowledge.

Usually this is the case.
Seniority is determined by rank and time in rank. all the rest is irrelevant.

There are some exceptions though. For example, in kendo the ranking is complicated because of the various master titles that have their own hierarchy. I honestly don't know how these ranks interact with the dan scale.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

So, how do you decide seniority in a room full of grandmasters, all who have different arts?