Here I go with another poorly digested ramble. I was talking to some older high ranking martial artists and it occurred to me that a couple of these individuals reached their high level black-belt ranks through years of practice, teaching and accumulating knowledge and through dedicated service to their associations, but not buy being especially good at fighting. In fact the best fighters I know are mostly at least 30 years younger than these guys, have a lot of fighting experience but do not have especially high ranks in whatever arts they've trained. On the other hand, of course there are older high ranking individuals who are awesome fighters. My question is this, "How common is it to find older, high ranking (3rd, 4th, 5th degree or higher) black-belts who may really know their stuff, but are not particularly good fighters?" and, "Does this even matter?"
Older? How old is older? 40? 45? 50? 55? 60? 65? 70? ..., .
If they never learned how to be aggressive fighters but they could produce people who were trained well and could fight should not that skill set be recognized?
I know it would be great if with each rank we could float an inch or foot higher off the ground or deflect that many bullets in the air. (* The original poster made no such claim this is just me rambling *) Then there would be this mystical way to measure a skill. If we had fights to the death to get rank and to get promotion and recognition, then we might et what happened in different cultures where many good fighters both died or were crippled proving their worth.
What is the meaning of the rank to you or to the person who has earned it.
What is the meaning of being a good fighter? Weapons as well as empty hands and multiple opponents?
There will always be a different point of view to judge people by. They are not the best fighter they are not the best teachers, they are too old, they are too young, they are skinny they are too fat / over weight, you name it.
I know I have had to fight a lot less over the years. I know that my skill set has increased over the years as well. I know I cannot roll for five five minute rounds with a 20 year old that runs marathons and scuba dives. So, I have to be smarter and use my timing and the skill set I have to win my bouts, and training. This does not mean I do not get tapped out or do not get hit or have bruises. It means I use my skill set over time to try to limit my exposure. I guess one could say I use my intelligence or brain or knowledge to stay even or ahead. Does it make be a better fighter though? I would say no. When I was 20 and did not care about being hurt and healed faster and laughed at the pain, it made me a better fighter. Was I the most skilled fighter? I would say no. I had fights before training began and after, and I would say I knew how to survive including being able to run away when out gunned or out manned. But when in those physical situations then I would say I was a better fighter as my attitude of not caring made it hard to scare me or to intimidate me. Today, I will defend myself but I know all about the pain and the issues with courts and know that I do not want to repeat those experiences if I do not have too.
Now that that has been said, I agree there are always those silly *** people out there who have high rank and cannot teach and cannot fight and cannot walk out of a room when given the chance. I know this frustrates me sometimes, so I understand the questions about skill sets and looking the part and being in condition and being or not being as the case may be.