# Should People Wear High Rank?



## MJS (Jul 12, 2007)

Seeing that there is alot of talk regarding Jeff and the comments that he made, I thought I'd start this thread.  

There seems to be alot of talk on the issue of rank.  Questions of time in grade and people who were quick to slap on a 10th have come up.  

Do you feel that people should refrain from wearing a 10th?  Looking at a post by one of Mr. Bob Whites students, he states that Mr. White refuses to put on a 10th, this I imagine, to be out of respect for Mr. Parker.

Reading a post on the KN, someone made an interesting analogy.  They stated, if someone was a 9th, and refused to wear a 10th out of respect for Parker, the highest they would ever go would be 9th.  If students, out of respect for their teacher refused to put on a 9th, the highest they'd go would be 8th.  This process would continue until everyone was just wearing a white belt.

Thoughts?


----------



## pete (Jul 12, 2007)

_This process would continue until everyone was just wearing a white belt.
_
cool, maybe then it will be about the art and not the accessories.

don't keep score? how do you measure yourself with the other golfers????
 by height.


----------



## Carol (Jul 12, 2007)

I disagree that the process would continue until everyone was just wearing a white belt.

In all Kenpo systems, there is a specific requirement of performance from yellow to first black.  Some systems test for material after first black.  Somewhere after the first black or first few degrees, there is no more tested material and promotions become political...and controversial.

Sometimes I wonder if some MAist find the task of building a lifelong reputation to be too pesky and cumbersome.  After all, its much easier to have a stripe embroidered on a belt than it is to have your actions speak louder than your accessories.


----------



## Steel Tiger (Jul 12, 2007)

Ranks above 5th are often difficult to quantify so it is difficult to say if someone should or should not have them.  That being said, I have always thought of 10th as a sort of theoretical rank reserved for the founders of styles.  This would equate to only one or maybe two people within a particular style having that rank.  The upshot of this is that 9th then becomes the highest rank is the system.

I believe that if you have done the work and others recognise that you have, then you should be entitled to wear whatever rank you have achieved.  Mr White's students may be right as to why he won't wear a 10th, but he might also be gun shy.  Meaning that there are so many out there who claim such lofty positions without real merit, that he would rather not have people thinking of him in the same way.  It would be unfortunate if it were the case.


----------



## LawDog (Jul 12, 2007)

I think that everyone is worring too much about what rank and belt someone has. What everyone should be concerned about is, 
*how much knowledge does he really possess, 
*what kind of student comes out of his school / system.
If someone refuses to wear a rank out of respect for someone, that was their choice.
:asian:


----------



## Drac (Jul 12, 2007)

LawDog said:


> If someone refuses to wear a rank out of respect for someone, that was their choice.
> :asian:


 
Well said...


----------



## LawDog (Jul 12, 2007)

Most Kenpo systems that I know of test for levels of black belt up to 5th or 6th dan.


----------



## stickarts (Jul 12, 2007)

LawDog said:


> I think that everyone is worring too much about what rank and belt someone has. What everyone should be concerned about is,
> *how much knowledge does he really possess,
> *what kind of student comes out of his school / system.
> If someone refuses to wear a rank out of respect for someone, that was their choice.
> :asian:


 
I agree.


----------



## MJS (Jul 12, 2007)

Carol Kaur said:


> I disagree that the process would continue until everyone was just wearing a white belt.
> 
> In all Kenpo systems, there is a specific requirement of performance from yellow to first black. Some systems test for material after first black. Somewhere after the first black or first few degrees, there is no more tested material and promotions become political...and controversial.


 
Such as we've seen with Speakman. 



> Sometimes I wonder if some MAist find the task of building a lifelong reputation to be too pesky and cumbersome. After all, its much easier to have a stripe embroidered on a belt than it is to have your actions speak louder than your accessories.


 
This is why I dont like the rank chasers.  When it happens, it happens, plain and simple.   Show me what you can do, show me that you understand the material, show me that you can apply the material...those are the things I look for.


----------



## MJS (Jul 12, 2007)

LawDog said:


> I think that everyone is worring too much about what rank and belt someone has. What everyone should be concerned about is,
> *how much knowledge does he really possess,
> *what kind of student comes out of his school / system.
> If someone refuses to wear a rank out of respect for someone, that was their choice.
> :asian:


 
Great points!!


----------



## kenpostudent (Jul 12, 2007)

I see a purpose for rank from white belt to 5th black: it denotes your level of education in the system. What purpose does rank after 5th black serve? In the military, rank indicates a command structure. It tells personnel who is in charge in a given situation...or who should assume responsibility in a crisis. 

We have no authoritarian structure in martial arts. Even if we tried to create one, in practice it would be far too circumventible. If I didn't like what one instructor says, I can go to another...that's what happens now. So again, what purpose is rank over 5th black? It is supposed to denote accomplishments in the art and one's overall reputation among peers. Is rank the best measure of that? Not when many 10th blacks in the system can't move even as well as 1st and 2nd blacks. 

Maybe we would be better off adopting the traditional Chinese system: at 5th black one becomes a Sifu. Beyond Sifu, the only designation is the Sifu's teacher. Rank is useless if it can't be backed up on the mats, anyway.


----------



## Ceicei (Jul 12, 2007)

kenpostudent said:


> I see a purpose for rank from white belt to 5th black: it denotes your level of education in the system. What purpose does rank after 5th black serve? In the military, rank indicates a command structure. It tells personnel who is in charge in a given situation...or who should assume responsibility in a crisis.
> 
> We have no authoritarian structure in martial arts. Even if we tried to create one, in practice it would be far too circumventible. If I didn't like what one instructor says, I can go to another...that's what happens now. So again, what purpose is rank over 5th black? It is supposed to denote accomplishments in the art and one's overall reputation among peers. Is rank the best measure of that? Not when many 10th blacks in the system can't move even as well as 1st and 2nd blacks.
> 
> Maybe we would be better off adopting the traditional Chinese system: at 5th black one becomes a Sifu. Beyond Sifu, the only designation is the Sifu's teacher. Rank is useless if it can't be backed up on the mats, anyway.



I really liked your points.  You've made excellent ones.  

- Ceicei


----------



## eyebeams (Jul 13, 2007)

kenpostudent said:


> Maybe we would be better off adopting the traditional Chinese system: at 5th black one becomes a Sifu. Beyond Sifu, the only designation is the Sifu's teacher. Rank is useless if it can't be backed up on the mats, anyway.



Which tradition are you referring too? Most CMAs don't award belts at all.


----------



## kidswarrior (Jul 13, 2007)

Carol Kaur said:


> Sometimes I wonder if some MAist find the task of building a lifelong reputation to be too pesky and cumbersome.


But 'building a reputation' comes full-circle to the question of politics, no? After all, a good reputation is only what others say about someone--maybe it's well-earned, maybe it's borne out of a lifetime of self-promotion (witness a plethora of politicians whose self-promotion has gotten them elected, which fact must show at least that voters have _some _faith in their reputation). Is it possible self-promotion could be a cornerstone of some MA reputations?



> After all, its much easier to have a stripe embroidered on a belt than it is to have your actions speak louder than your accessories.


But who will judge these actions, and how have they been screened as worthy? Who will have the final say as to another's worthiness as an MAist--whether the actions are truly up to the standard of the stripe level?

Obviously, I'm playing devils' advocate, but only because I wonder if we don't often travel full circle in our thinking about this. Beginning with: rank can and should be fairly earned; to: someone must pronounce our rank as being fairly earned; and finally to: who chooses the 'someone' who determines if another's rank is/was fairly earned? For those happily ensconced in large organizations, this is moot--they will always have seniors and examining boards. For those of us with more maverick stories, tho, ....

Anyway, it's late, I'm probably rambling, so if this makes no sense, apologies and please ignore. :asian:


----------



## 08Neely (Jul 13, 2007)

Interesting topic and one I may have something to add to.

I have recently returned to Kempo after a 10 year layoff, Masters/Villari/Cerio vein of SKK in the northeast.
10 years later in Arizona I joined a dojo that teaches SKK with some twists.
Funny thing is though that none of the Blackbelts wear degree stripes on their belts.
That was one of the things that struck me about this place, I really liked seeing that. 
I would estimate that there are several 5th and above blackbelts here just based on them working with me.

Stripes on a belt are no roadmap to respect, as far as I am concerned any person in a Dojo that is willing to spend time as an instructor, student, or classmate is worthy of the same respect.


----------



## Rob Broad (Jul 13, 2007)

If the person who is wearing the 9th has not done anything to advance the art and is only teaching what they have been taught in the past, then they should remain a 9th. If they have found a way to advance the art in a positive direction then they should be able to wear a 10th since it is no longer the original art, but a hybrid based up on what they have learned. Now for the caveat, they should not be able to decide when to wear that 10th, it should be bestowed upon them by their peers, and I am not talking about a good ole boys network.


----------



## LawDog (Jul 13, 2007)

kidswarrior,
I agree with your statement that self promotion can create a reputation,(to a point).
End of line, Over time it will be what their students look like and how much they really know that will prove out any built / acquired reputation.
:yoda:


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 13, 2007)

The way Juchnik Hanshi has set up Kosho Ryu there is no grade above 7th Black.  He himself is 7th black.  Most just wear regular black belts and if you want to know someon's rank you'd have to ask them.

For all the political & organizational mumbo jumbo he uses the Japanese titles you may have heard.

Shihan - lit. Shining Example - Not really a skill denotation but an indication of some organizational role.  Rank req. at least 1st Black.

Renshi - a master - Organizational role and significant skill contribution.  Rank req. 4th or 5th black (not sure)

Kyoshi - headmaster - Upper level in organization and upper level skills.  Unlike every lower title these have the authority to promote to yudansha (black belt) levels.  Rank req. 6th or 7th??

Hanshi - root master - This is the title Juchnik uses.  In the SKSKI the same title was also bestowed on Thomas Young & Paul Yamaguchi.

Grandmaster was the title for James M. Mitose.  What was told to me was that although Mitose gave Juchnik a Menkyo Kaiden (Martial Arts Mastery) & Inka Shomei (Religious Certification), which according to Mitose signified the authority to do with Kosho Ryu as he saw fit, Juchnik felt that the art should be kept in the family.  Juchnik had orchestrated reconciliation between Mitose and Thomas Barros.  So before Mitose's death, Tom was to take the system and become the Grandmaster but he was to be tutored in his family art by Juchnik.  It seems Tom only wanted to be tutored for so long and eventually just assumed his father's last name and went with the Kajukenbo base he already had and blended it with what little Kosho he had learned from Juchnik.  So, Juchnik doesn't claim to be a Grandmaster (though in the opinion of many he could, mine included) but only seeks to pass on & preserve what he's been given.

_Don Flatt


----------



## Sukerkin (Jul 13, 2007)

Rank is a tricky issue in some ways and I have to say that there've been some very good posts in this thread already that hit just the right notes.

I count myself fortunate that in my art (Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu iaido) we carry no overt signs of rank.  You judge by what you observe the rank a person is at.  

For example, if I see my sensei performing a kata it is immediately clear why _he_ is a 5th Dan Renshi and _I_ am not - even if he were to wear an obi with additional insignia you wouldn't see it anyway as it goes under the hakama .

For those styles which do wear external signs of rank (which is most styles I would think), the rank structure forms a very valuable graduated scale upon which a student can measure themselves and set attainable goals.  That's the raison d'etre for the system in the first place, after all.

Once you get beyond fifth dan tho', as has already been pointed out, that structure is no longer about skill and technique but about tenure and contribution.  Those sort of distinctions are, I fell, better handled via the system of 'teacher' titles than additional dan grades.

One thing I believe, and this is a totally personal perspective, is that being too overt about rank gained runs somewhat counter to the philosophy of keeping control over your ego that is central to many arts.


----------



## Jdokan (Jul 13, 2007)

A matter of personal choice...For me I wear a black belt sometimes and then sometimes I wear my stripes depends on my mood....Right now I'm breaking in a new belt... In time I hope it begins to look like my old belt...
That will be good enough for me...
With regards to the amount of 10th out there....there was a great post somewhere one time as quoted from Prof. Chow....(very loosely) "There are so many 10th degrees out there now, I must be ranked a 15th".  This is a very bad translation please forgive my memory but the intent of his words are what I remember more than the exact quote... Too many chiefs...not enough Indians...


----------



## Brian Jones (Jul 13, 2007)

Doesn't bother me.  I figure they are the ones who have to wear it, and justify it.  As long as they have something they can teach me, I don't worry about it.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jul 13, 2007)

Truthfully I think that we sometimes mess things up in certain ways.  As a founder Ed Parker should be beyond the rank irregardless of what he wore as he was the *founder of his system*. (that is his title)  So if his system was created with 10 degrees then anyone else should be able to achieve that if they have the skill. (I am sure that was his intent)  Same for Modern Arnis with Remy Presas.  Same for any system.  If someone founds a system and sets up a certain way of ranking then should not everyone who trains in that system be able to achieve the top rank if they are dedicated and have the skill. :idunno:  Irregardless of the art there will always be good, bad and incredible practitioners of that particular system.  There will also be practitioners of that system that will also be *better over time* than the origional founder.  That is progress.  Within Kenpo you can see that there are several individuals that have passed Ed Parker in skill if not in mental creativeness.  Still they owe that skill to Ed Parker's creativeness and of course their own inate talents.  So let them wear what they want and if they choose not to want a 10th degree in Kenpo then that is their choice but should not reflect on anyone else who has or deserves a 10th degree based on Kenpo teachings.  Just my 02. as always!


----------



## shesulsa (Jul 13, 2007)

MJS, does he refuse to *wear* the 10th stripe rank or refuse to *accept* it?

And Brian brings up a good point - the "founder" of the system would hold a place beyond rank, essentially.  I know in some styles 10th degree is reserved for either the founder or the founder's successor.

So ... as to how high a person can go, it seems like everyone could still go just as high as their teacher - if teacher is 8th and student wants to test for 8th, then it is incumbent upon that student's teacher to arrange a test with a 9th degree panel and possibly the head of the system, no?

I dunno ... I earned a 1st degree bb and I rarely even wear *it.*


----------



## kidswarrior (Jul 13, 2007)

LawDog said:


> kidswarrior,
> 
> End of line, *Over time it will be what their students look like and how much they really know that will prove out any* built / acquired *reputation*.
> :yoda:


Well said, *LawDog*. And actually you make the point I should have made earlier: it's not self-promotion, but the promotion of the success of others (our students) by which we (instructors) should be judged. Note _I did not say, the promotion *in rank* of our students _(external change), but the promotion of their skills, understanding, love of the Arts, and for some, maybe even growth as individuals (all internal). Now _that _will be a true yardstick of one's work and value to/achievement in the MA.  Good call LD.



			
				Sukerkin said:
			
		

> For those styles which do wear external signs of rank (which is most styles I would think), the rank structure forms a very valuable graduated scale upon which a student can measure themselves and set attainable goals. That's the raison d'etre for the system in the first place, after all.


Good point, *Suke*, and especially so when working with teenage boys (as I do ), who usually are very competitive. If I were a basketball coach, instead of MA instructor, for example, and had won a bunch of trophies during my own training days, I would probably keep them around for kids to see, even though doing so might feel gaudy and embarrassing to me; but if they painted a picture of the possibility of success for even a few kids, my discomfort would have been worth it.



> One thing I believe, and this is a totally personal perspective, is that being too overt about rank gained runs somewhat counter to the philosophy of keeping control over your ego that is central to many arts.


This is the other side, the reason I hate displaying rank (not that mine is high enough to register on the radar of this discussion ). But with adults, I think the attitudes change and they are better able to discern who is who and what they might achieve without external aids. So I do it for kids; doesn't mean I like it, tho. 

BTW, I'm locked out of the repping center for a few more hours, but will come back later and catch up with a few of the posters here.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jul 13, 2007)

This thread got carried over onto Kenpotalk, and this was my answer there:

__________________________
well, i've laid out my feelings on this in the past, but this thread seems particularly appropriate to do so again, so here goes...

I personally think the whole structure of black belt ranks should be mostly eliminated. I feel the lower levels serve a reasonable purpose in motivating students and measure progress along the way, so I don't see a reason to discard that. But once someone reaches black belt level, I really feel they should no longer need the carrot dangled in front of their face, to motivate their training. If they cannot find their own motivation at that level, then they do not deserve the rank and should go put on their old green belt again.

I feel there should be only two levels of black belt: first level is simply black belt, but without teaching authority. The second is simply black belt, with teaching authority. And once someone receives teaching authority, they then have the authority to promote their own students up to teaching authority. That's it. No more. Of course there is always more to learn, everyone knows who is better and from whom one might learn more and grow, but I think rank and titles beyond that level serve little purpose.

I suppose someone who founds a new style would be the recognized founder, but they would still just be black belt with teaching authority. 

I think this just assumes that people need to take ownership of their material and their training at that level. People should perhaps be less beholden to others, and have the freedom to own the material and do with it as they will, because ultimately that is what one must do. If you don't trust you student to do that, then don't give them the rank yet. But once the rank is given, a certain amount of control must be given up.


----------



## Sukerkin (Jul 13, 2007)

I quite agree, *Mike*, particularly about the 'motivation' aspect.  

I don't keep turning up to iai week in and week out so that I can make the next grade - I do it because I love the art.

I'm obviously biased because it's the way *I* think but I do believe that that is the only motivation which persists.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jul 13, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> I quite agree, *Mike*, particularly about the 'motivation' aspect.
> 
> I don't keep turning up to iai week in and week out so that I can make the next grade - I do it because I love the art.
> 
> I'm obviously biased because it's the way *I* think but I do believe that that is the only motivation which persists.


 
I am definately with you in regards to this.


----------



## Jdokan (Jul 13, 2007)

kidswarrior said:


> Well said, *LawDog*. And actually you make the point I should have made earlier: it's not self-promotion, but the promotion of the success of others (our students) by which we (instructors) should be judged. Note _I did not say, the promotion *in rank* of our students _(external change), but the promotion of their skills, understanding, love of the Arts, and for some, maybe even growth as individuals (all internal). Now _that _will be a true yardstick of one's work and value to/achievement in the MA.  Good call LD.
> 
> Good point, *Suke*, and especially so when working with teenage boys (as I do ), who usually are very competitive. If I were a basketball coach, instead of MA instructor, for example, and had won a bunch of trophies during my own training days, I would probably keep them around for kids to see, even though doing so might feel gaudy and embarrassing to me; but if they painted a picture of the possibility of success for even a few kids, my discomfort would have been worth it.
> 
> ...


Great point smade...
We are what are children turn out to be....most the time...


----------



## HKphooey (Jul 13, 2007)

I respect the Man or the Woman, not the belt.   Rank has always been a gauge for my own progress, but not the ulitmate satisfaction.  

I will bow in respect to any teacher or student.  If you do not bow back, your issue - not mine.  

To each his or her own.

But think where our miltary would be without rank insignia.  There would be some happy privates and petty officers!  Drinks at the officers' club!


----------



## Kosho-Monk (Jul 13, 2007)

Speaking of titles, here is part of a letter I wrote to a martial arts teacher living in Japan for many years now and his reponse.




Mark Groenewold Sensei,

...I have had several teachers and all of them seem to have different ideas and thoughts about Japanese titles. Sensei, Shihan, Hanshi, Soke, Renshi, etc.

I was wondering if you could provide me with some information about proper usage of titles, according to Japanese traditions. I would like to understand this once-and-for-all.


Domo Arigato, John Evans




Dear John,

...let me take a little space here and try to define what these words mean, how they are used, and how they ought to be used.
SENSEI: A word meaning teacher, and is used for anyone who is the head of your class. If there are several teachers standing together and you need the attention of the head teacher all you need say is Sensei and that person will look at you. Otherwise you should use the surname of the person you want to talk to like, Yoshioka-Sensei or Mori-Sensei. SHIHAN: This word is commonly meant to have the meaning of master teacher and is supposed to be reserved for ranks above 5th or 6th dan. Just like the word Sensei, it can never be self-referential. Taniguchi-Sensei is not a big fan of people calling him Shihan, and I have never heard him use it as a term to describe someone else either. RENSHI: This word is supposed to mean polished or master instructor. It is a term used for those who are in the 5th and 6th degree black belt strata of martial arts hierarchy. Personally, I have never heard this word used in Japan in reference to anyone. HANSHI: This term is supposed to mean master and is someone who apparently has been kicking around the martial arts for some time. Confirmed on a select few in the 8th and 9th degree category. This word, just like Renshi, is a term I have never heard used here in Japan. SOKE: This term is supposed to have to have a spiritual or even ancestral element to it as the founder or ancestral seat of a particular style. I have never heard this term used to describe anyone in karate circles in Japan. Here are a few more for what it is worth. And some of them you might actually use:
YUDANSHA: People who are black belts and act as instructors or assistant-instructors. MUDANSHA: People who are still at the kyu levels of karate. HASHA: Not used often, but referred to with Tanaka-Sensei in his video, Densho. It means supreme champion or ruler. It is a little too over-the-top for my tastes. But to each his own, I suppose. KYOSHI: Instructor. I like this term above all. It sounds very collegial in karate. Kyoshi-tachi means instructors, and is a very nice equalizing term to use when describing the group of black belt instructors, assistants, and leaders. Now whether or not this is the once-and-for-all solution that you were looking for remains to be seen. I hope that I have translated these words adequately for you. I realize that in the West we try to authenticate what words we use to describe and attribute to our seniors in karate, but realize as well that the best teachers would hate to be called any of these titles, with the exception of sensei. But even there the term can never be self-referential.

Speaking of which, please just call me Mark.

One of the coolest things I ever saw was when Kagawa-Sensei (super-human karate man) was giving us a seminar for a couple of days. The first words out of his mouth when he addressed us in class was, I don't really know a lot about karate, but I have a few ideas how to make some fundamentals work. Let me show you a couple of things. Such a man would never say, Hi, I'm Kagawa. Please call me Hanshi. That would be completely inappropriate and out of character. People would think that he is a megalomaniac. And they would be right to think so, too.
Hope this helps a little!

Mark


----------



## Kosho-Monk (Jul 13, 2007)

Here's a link to a good article about the use of Japanese titles....


http://www.dragon-tsunami.org/Cfa/Pages/CFAGrades.htm


----------



## kidswarrior (Jul 13, 2007)

HKphooey said:


> I respect the Man or the Woman, not the belt.   Rank has always been a gauge for my own progress, but not the ulitmate satisfaction.
> 
> I will bow in respect to any teacher or student.  If you do not bow back, your issue - not mine.
> 
> ...


Naw, more like the other way around. Some happy admirals and generals because they could then pose as Gunnies and Chiefs, and actually get something done.


----------



## MJS (Jul 13, 2007)

shesulsa said:


> MJS, does he refuse to *wear* the 10th stripe rank or refuse to *accept* it?
> 
> Looking at this post from one of his students, he refused to accept it.
> 
> ...


----------



## MJS (Jul 13, 2007)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Truthfully I think that we sometimes mess things up in certain ways. As a founder Ed Parker should be beyond the rank irregardless of what he wore as he was the *founder of his system*. (that is his title) So if his system was created with 10 degrees then anyone else should be able to achieve that if they have the skill. (I am sure that was his intent) Same for Modern Arnis with Remy Presas. Same for any system. If someone founds a system and sets up a certain way of ranking then should not everyone who trains in that system be able to achieve the top rank if they are dedicated and have the skill. :idunno: Irregardless of the art there will always be good, bad and incredible practitioners of that particular system. There will also be practitioners of that system that will also be *better over time* than the origional founder. That is progress. Within Kenpo you can see that there are several individuals that have passed Ed Parker in skill if not in mental creativeness. Still they owe that skill to Ed Parker's creativeness and of course their own inate talents. So let them wear what they want and if they choose not to want a 10th degree in Kenpo then that is their choice but should not reflect on anyone else who has or deserves a 10th degree based on Kenpo teachings. Just my 02. as always!


 
Good points.  I think in this case though, there were many who slapped on the double bars once Parker passed on.  I dont know if those folks were 'tested' IFO a panel or if they just chose to do it.


----------



## grydth (Jul 13, 2007)

In my opinion, house rules should apply. The Shihan and Renshi who train my daughters are fine martial artists and fine human beings. They do wear rank - it is their dojo and they can do what they wish.

On the other hand, one of the deadliest instructors I had almost never wore anything that would ID him - inside or outside of class - as a sifu or martial artist. In fact, he taught it as a survival skill - don't let on to attackers that you can fight... no poses or stances... act casual or frightened, even.... and, at the last moment, explode into them.

To each his own.


----------



## terryl965 (Jul 13, 2007)

Should rank matter no does rank matter yes, it is the cornerstone to building wealth in the martial arts and will always be. This is why we can never ever get pass all the BS inside or outside of a dojo or dojang, I beleive that rank means very little anymore and if you need to have it to make you feel better than go for it. I for one feel that silence is a golden rule rank is meaningless but skill and knowledge is everything.


----------



## kenpostudent (Jul 13, 2007)

Rank would not be such a touchy subject if it was actually objective. Think of college degrees. A board of regents sets up very objective criteria for one to be awarded a bachelor's, masters, or terminal degree. If you meet those standards, you are awarded the degree...period. If martial arts could set up a system similar to a board of regents within each system (which many styles have...TKD, HKD, Aikido, ect.) then these petty squabbles over rank can be averted. The only rub is, like boxing, if someone doesn't like an current organization, they just start another. So, now there are too many boxing champions to count...just like there are more kenpo 10th dans than I can name. 

It goes back to objective criteria. The "contribution to the art" standard for rank beyond 5th dan is tenous because of the inherent subjectivity. Does writing a book or releasing a set of tapes constitute enough of a contribution to the art to put on the next rank? Some will agree, others won't. How about a set number of students or schools? Then the McDojos would certainly have a high concentration of "Masters", "Renshis", and "Hanshis."

I personally believe that we should require a formal education for rank beyond 5th black. Set up a university of martial arts for each system. This way aspiring teachers can earn a doctorate in the art they choose. Continuing professional education would be mandatory after a degree was conferred (just like the medical, legal, and accounting professions). There would be no dispute of rank in that event. You would essentially have a potent regulatory body that could control quality and issue standards for a given style (akin to the SEC or the Financial Accounting Standards Board).


----------



## kidswarrior (Jul 13, 2007)

Deleted by poster.


----------



## Doc (Jul 13, 2007)

My take on the issue is somewhat unorthdox but works for those in my lineage. First we wear no stripes at all. For us it is unnecessary. When you go into an academic classroom, no one wears a badge or sign that says professor or student. Students do what students do. They learn. Professors do what professors do. They teach. If you walked into a classroom cold, you'd know who is who without having to be told. So it is in my classrooms.

Second of all, administratively we make a distinction between "numerical rank," and "academic rank and titles." The two do not correlate with each other. That is, if you are a 3rd black, that doesn't automatically make you a "full Instructor."

All numerical ranks are emeritus or honorary. Academic rank titles are specifically linked to ability and knowledge and teaching certification levels. Therefore a person who has trained for an extended period for personal reasons may gain numerical rank. It does not allow, or bestow any academic titles whatsoever. These are earned separately and rigorously exclusive once again of numerical designations.


----------



## kenpostudent (Jul 13, 2007)

All numerical ranks are emeritus or honorary. Academic rank titles are specifically linked to ability and knowledge and teaching certification levels. Therefore a person who has trained for an extended period for personal reasons may gain numerical rank. It does not allow, or bestow any academic titles whatsoever. These are earned separately and rigorously exclusive once again of numerical designations.[/QUOTE]

Interesting concept. How are "academic rank titles" earned as opposed to "numerical rank?"


----------



## Doc (Jul 13, 2007)

kenpostudent said:


> All numerical ranks are emeritus or honorary. Academic rank titles are specifically linked to ability and knowledge and teaching certification levels. Therefore a person who has trained for an extended period for personal reasons may gain numerical rank. It does not allow, or bestow any academic titles whatsoever. These are earned separately and rigorously exclusive once again of numerical designations.
> 
> Interesting concept. How are "academic rank titles" earned as opposed to "numerical rank?"



Numerical: Some just want to be able to do. Academic: Others want to do and teach which requires additional knowledge and understanding not required for numerical rank.


----------



## LawDog (Jul 14, 2007)

Old School
Dan ranks: The tests will cover the following areas but are not restricted to.
*Physical ability,
*Understanding the interaction between more than one, (yourself alone).

Titles: These are seperate tests from the dan tests.
1)Teaching titles are for advance theory / concepts of a given system. These tests will cover the following area's.
A) must be able to list all of the theories / concepts.
B) must understand all the theories / concepts. Because an instructor can give the exact definition of a theory / concept does not mean the he fully understands it.
C)Recognize a theory / concept. Many instructors can list and do understand a theory / concept but have a hard time recognizing them within many of the preset's, forms or non preset pattern drills.
D)You must be able to teach the theories / concepts back to a senior Instructor.
2)Leadership titles. In some systems the upper two or three ranks are used as leadership positions within their given system / organization. These ranks are not floor tested they usually done by using an evaluation process.
A)You must possess the highest teaching title,
B)You will usually go through a long term evaluation process. During this time you will be given a series of projects to complete. These projects are designed to show your leadership abilities. Some of these projects could be setting up and running a large camp, seminars or even tournaments.
These are usually harder to pass than the dan rank tests.

There is a new problem with titles, in some cases they are either given away to unqualified Instructors or self adorned in an attempt to impress.


----------



## kidswarrior (Jul 15, 2007)

kidswarrior said:


> Naw, more like the other way around. Some happy admirals and generals because they could then pose as Gunnies and Chiefs, and actually get something done.



Hey, whoever repped me for this, Thanks! Hit me with a PM so I know who you are.


----------



## kenpostudent (Jul 16, 2007)

Doc said:


> Numerical: Some just want to be able to do. Academic: Others want to do and teach which requires additional knowledge and understanding not required for numerical rank.



Are there specific differences in the testing process for numerical rank and academic rank? If so, can you detail some of those distinctions?


----------



## Josh Oakley (Jul 20, 2007)

MJS said:


> Seeing that there is alot of talk regarding Jeff and the comments that he made, I thought I'd start this thread.
> 
> There seems to be alot of talk on the issue of rank.  Questions of time in grade and people who were quick to slap on a 10th have come up.
> 
> ...



Hyperbole. However, that is already happening to a degree in kendo (no one can rank above 8th Dan, and even that rank is dying out).


----------



## Gentle Fist (Jul 21, 2007)

IMHO, Kenpo is one of the easier systems to obtain high rank in.  Just look at Judo for example.  You have to be in your 70's to obtain 10th dan.  How many Judans do you know that are in Kenpo and haven't turned 60 yet, how about 50?  Hell in Nebraska one guy is not even 35 yet and sports the highest rank in the art.  I know all rank is subjective but to the general public it is all the same.  I personally want to see it proved day in and day out on the floor, who cares what red/gold/silver belt they are wearing.

Sorry for the minor rant, but I train in both Ke?po and BJJ/Judo.  So it is a daily observation for me.:soapbox:


----------



## selfdefensemaniac (Jul 28, 2007)

People can use the rank they want. 
But respect its what you have to earn.


----------



## seninoniwashi (Aug 9, 2007)

Carol Kaur said:


> Somewhere after the first black or first few degrees, there is no more tested material and promotions become political...and controversial.


 
So very true. Unfortunately this is why alot of people out there give up after getting their 1st dan or back out after their 2nd. Not to many people want to deal with the politics of promotion


----------



## IWishToLearn (Aug 9, 2007)

fistlaw720 said:


> IMHO, Kenpo is one of the easier systems to obtain high rank in.  Just look at Judo for example.  You have to be in your 70's to obtain 10th dan.  How many Judans do you know that are in Kenpo and haven't turned 60 yet, how about 50?  Hell in Nebraska one guy is not even 35 yet and sports the highest rank in the art.  I know all rank is subjective but to the general public it is all the same.  I personally want to see it proved day in and day out on the floor, who cares what red/gold/silver belt they are wearing.
> 
> Sorry for the minor rant, but I train in both Ke?po and BJJ/Judo.  So it is a daily observation for me.:soapbox:



True bout the dude in Nebraska - but that whole situation is a rather "odd" situation.


----------



## Sukerkin (Aug 9, 2007)

Chaps, what's important in the end is how good your own training has been.

There will always be occaisions in which you encounter someone nominally higher ranked than yourself who, in fact, is less advanced.

To be frank, in the end, who cares?  I know that it is annoying but, and I know this doesn't really take much sting out of it {}, it doesn't change a thing about your own level of training or development.  

I have watched people ranked two or three (or more) grades higher than myself and had the secret inner thought that they weren't better than me.  What counts is the regard with which you are held in *context* i.e. how you compare with your immediate fellows.

The rest is not important ... altho' I accede that if you're running your own school other considerations come into play.


----------

