What makes a Grandmaster better than a 6th degree black belt Master?

[drop bear]

Being able to hold an organisation together is probably worth its own rank

 

[Buka]

I know a bunch of guys, from different styles, different organizations. We've been friends for over forty years, knew them as underbelts. Most traditional MA,(different ones) some not. Five are 10ths, two are 9ths, bunch of others are 8ths. Good guys, same as they were before, just more seasoned. Their rank and titles are what they are because somebody else promoted them.

What's the difference between them and some sixths? Hell if I know. They're still good guys, most tell better jokes now.

 

[pgsmith]

What makes a Grandmaster better than a 6th degree black belt Master?

I thought it was the start of a joke, so I was looking for the punch line (punch line ... ha!)

I'm disappointed now.

 

[Tames D]

I know a bunch of guys, from different styles, different organizations. We've been friends for over forty years, knew them as underbelts. Most traditional MA,(different ones) some not. Five are 10ths, two are 9ths, bunch of others are 8ths. Good guys, same as they were before, just more seasoned. Their rank and titles are what they are because somebody else promoted them.

What's the difference between them and some sixths? Hell if I know. They're still good guys, most tell better jokes now.

Sure... but have they mastered the buffet table?

 

[JR 137]

It seems that you are confusing or mixing up a "dan" ranking and a title...what does Master and Grand Master mean?

Without overthinking it, to me it's simple - a master is someone who's mastered the art relative to most others. A grandmaster is a master's master. Just my quick and working definition.

I do and don't have rank and titles confused; some arts and organizations tie specific titles to specific ranks, others don't. Some titles can only be earned at or after specific ranks, but those titles aren't automatic.

Now that I think of it, most Japanese organizations I know of don't use the term grandmaster. The few that do usually refer to the head of the organization as their grandmaster (but don't call/address them as such). I think grandmaster is far more common in Korean arts and possibly Chinese arts.

The organization I'm in is headed by Tadashi Nakamura, 9th dan. He's the only 9th dan in the organization. The only time I've seen grandmaster associated with anyone is with him, and it's always been in writing and in parentheses; no one in the organization calls him nor refers to as grandmaster Nakamura.

Now that I think about it, off the top of my head I've never seen grandmaster being used in Okinawan systems.

Sorry for the sidetrack.

 

[KenpoDave]

What is the difference between a father and a grandfather?

 

[Buka]

Sure... but have they mastered the buffet table?
View attachment 20113

Some of them, quite well, yes.

 

[Th0mas]

You can always spot a grand master by the length of their belt, and in some cases the width. The longer the better - enables them to display more gold stripes.

Also just to make sure, a lot of grand masters like to add additional elements to their Gi. A gold satin tabard is always a real give away - it helps to focus their chi balls and no-touch death strikes.

Once you have reached the giddy heights of Grandmasterdom it is really important to advertise the fact by appearing in Martial Arts magazines.. Best if you can make fearsome facial expressions grow a wispy beard and form tiger claws with your hands too.

Plain old masters just don't have the necessary rank to be able to demonstrate their awesomeness through what they wear.

 

[pgsmith]

Sure... but have they mastered the buffet table?
View attachment 20113

Some of them, such as Grandmaster Soke Jaime Ortiz, seem to have ...

 

[Mark Lynn]

From a certain level (5 Dan?) it have nothing to do with the technical level. It is more representative of the contribution to the art. And often it means nothing at all...

I disagree with the GMs and high ranking black belts/instructors that I have trained under and or seen, often times those high ranks know more and have more skill than the lower ranks (dan grades). Now does this mean they kick as I or are as fast etc. etc. Nope, but are speed and high kicks the skill sets we use to judge how good a person is. If so then we should have a lot of 20-30 yr old GMs.

The real question is...what do the terms "master" and "grandmaster" really mean?

This is a good question but I believe it has several different answers which mean different things to different people.
1) It could be the founder of the art, that person is the highest rank the GM so to speak. Those beneath the founder are the masters once they reach a certain skill/knowledge level as determined by the governing body or head of the system i.e.the GM.

2) GM could also be looked at in a sense as the grandfather with the master being like a father. But this again speaks to the head of a system or a hierarchy of sorts. GM could be given to an individual who has contributed to the art, through teaching, promotion, skill, time in the art etc. etc. Again this speaks to guidance as in the grandfather having lived and seen more, lived more than the rest of the household. Even within an organization there could be more than one GM, because they teach different expressions of the art or have reached a certain level of skill that they are really on their own.

3) It could be just a promotional name or a way an organization honors a person. I've even seen (heard of) SGM as in Supreme Grand Masters as a way to put their GM over top of all others in a sense.

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.

"Or it may mean they've been around long enough and maintained high enough standards that they've earned that level of respect."
Generally I think this is what is going on. Not that it means nothing at all, or that the person has bought their way in etc. etc.

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.

Now I wonder how many here posting have actually seen high dan ranks training teaching etc. etc., or actually trained, or talked with or have relationships with masters and GMs? Seriously, I don't mean it as a put down or anything, but I wonder.

One time a saw the highest ranked living Kendoka (from Japan) wipe the floor, with several high ranking kendoka all who were 4-5th dans and in their prime (they were 40's -50's), the old sensei looked like Yoda as in old, barely walking, and yet on the floor he had subtle movements that allowed him to get his cuts in before the opponents did. I have a picture of him sparring with my friend; and while my friend is cutting downward for a (mein?) strike, the old sensei is just tilting his head and is in the process of countering my friends cut and you can see my friend lost, from the picture even though my friend started the attack, and the old man barely moved, my friend who's fully committed is done. He lost.

 

[Xue Sheng]

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. ?!?!

Grandmaster in what?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

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. ?!?!

That "impractical stuff" is often just deeper levels of the art. Most folks get the fundamentals quite good in the first decade or two. After that, continued study is really about getting to learn deeper and deeper into the art. What those guys are working on is, in fact, impractical for folks in their first decade or so. That "impractical stuff", however, is the "why" behind the stories folks have told in this thread about how effective some of these really old guys get (like the Kendo GM mentioned earlier). These folks are often working with a very deep understanding of the principles being used, and so are able to use them in subtle ways that use less motion and less strength.

 

[donald1]

IMO,
I would expect a grandmaster has more training experience and knows more practical uses for his/her techniques. If a grandmaster stood next to a sixth dan and they practiced the same exact from you should be able to tell which is the grandmaster even if neither of them are wearing their belts

 

[FlamingJulian]

Grandmaster in what?

Taekwondo


-Julian

 

[FlamingJulian]

IMO,
I would expect a grandmaster has more training experience and knows more practical uses for his/her techniques. If a grandmaster stood next to a sixth dan and they practiced the same exact from you should be able to tell which is the grandmaster even if neither of them are wearing their belts

Thanks for your answer. makes sense


-Julian

 

[Dirty Dog]

Mostly, I think that what you'll find is two things:
1 - a deeper understanding of the principles underlying the techniques
2 - a long history of service to the art.

 

[FlamingJulian]

Mostly, I think that what you'll find is two things:
1 - a deeper understanding of the principles underlying the techniques
2 - a long history of service to the art.

Thanks for answering


-Julian

 

[marques]

I disagree with the GMs and high ranking black belts/instructors that I have trained under and or seen, often times those high ranks know more and have more skill than the lower ranks (dan grades). Now does this mean they kick as I or are as fast etc. etc. Nope, but are speed and high kicks the skill sets we use to judge how good a person is. If so then we should have a lot of 20-30 yr old GMs.

To give just one example, one of this "masters" (5 Dan) had trouble defending slow pre-determined front kick. His movement was nervous and started before the kick. (So he was 'defending' no kick and I was adjusting the distance... Embarrassing.) Then he 'panicked' when I changed to the other leg without announcement. What is it?
To give just one example.
PS: After verifying this "master" is 'only' 5 Dan. Next time I will pick the 6 or 7 Dan for examples like this.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

To give just one example, one of this "masters" (5 Dan) had trouble defending slow pre-determined front kick. His movement was nervous and started before the kick. (So he was 'defending' no kick and I was adjusting the distance... Embarrassing.) Then he 'panicked' when I changed to the other leg without announcement. What is it?
To give just one example.
PS: After verifying this "master" is 'only' 5 Dan. Next time I will pick the 6 or 7 Dan for examples like this.

If someone at 5th dan can't defend easily against a kick he knows is coming, he shouldn't be a 5th dan in anything that includes defenses against kicks.

 

[marques]

If someone at 5th dan can't defend easily against a kick he knows is coming, he shouldn't be a 5th dan in anything that includes defenses against kicks.

Jujitsu. Sort of.