# GrandMaster Steve? Who qualifies as an authentic Grandmaster?



## Jusroc (Oct 24, 2021)

Hello.
While reading one of the other sub forum posts, a term came up that I had never heard before.
The term was "Grand master Steve".

I was wondering if this term was referring to a particular person, or was a term that referred to a particular type of person (I.e. a person of poor martial art skill, knowledge, who was promoting himself as a Grand Master).

I also then ask, what makes a person an authentic grand master.
Does a person have to come from an authentic lineage and inherit the Grand Master title from the last Grand Master.

Does that mean Prof Helio Gracie and Prof Jigoro Kano are both "Grand Master Steve's"
Does that mean GM Edmund K. Parker is a "Grand Master Steve"
Does that mean Miyamoto Musashi is also a "Grand Master Steve" (coming from peasant and non Samurai lineage).

And if it does, then surely, if you go back far enough in any style, there has always been a "Grand Master Steve" at the very beginning of each style.

No wonder Bruce Lee / Dan Inosanto weren't into grades apart from instructor / student.
Like the old Chinese tradition.

Was it Kano that created the grading system that created monsters out of so many...

My favourite Grand Master
is Grand Master Flash.... "don't push me.... cause I'm too close to the edge..!"
Grand Master Flash & The Furious Five


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 24, 2021)

The term comes from chess, which has rigid definitions of who is and isn't one. Likewise certain fraternal societies. I have been a Deputy Grand Master of one of the latter, although I no longer am a member. 

With regard to martial arts, there are no universal standards of any sort. Anyone may call themselves anything.


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 24, 2021)

Jusroc said:


> Hello.
> While reading one of the other sub forum posts, a term came up that I had never heard before.
> The term was "Grand master Steve".
> 
> ...


Sadly, the video is not working.


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 24, 2021)

Bill Mattocks said:


> The term comes from chess, which has rigid definitions of who is and isn't one. Likewise certain fraternal societies. I have been a Deputy Grand Master of one of the latter, although I no longer am a member.
> 
> With regard to martial arts, there are no universal standards of any sort. Anyone may call themselves anything.


It has been quite a while since I brought this up (I get bashed every time I do) but this is a very, very good example of why I wish there was some sort of organized criteria and certification medium to prevent this. I think it would have to be a government of representatives from the major styles as overseers and it would add a layer of bureaucracy that I would not relish but I think the ends justifies the means. 
KKW-TKD comes as close as anything I know of but even they are pretty loosely regulated at times IMHO. 

I am pretty deep in this lineage and feel qualified to make that statement.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Oct 24, 2021)

There are no grandmasters in Chinese martial arts.....just teachers...anyone calling themselves grandmaster is just doing it because they decided they were or for purposes of making money


----------



## MadMartigan (Oct 24, 2021)

Jusroc said:


> I was wondering if this term was referring to a particular person, or was a term that referred to a particular type of person (I.e. a person of poor martial art skill, knowledge, who was promoting himself as a Grand Master).


Here's where I land on this (not being even close to such a destination myself).

If you decide that people should be calling you grand master... then you're probably a gm steve.
If the honorific is given to you by others (your peers etc)... that's another story.


----------



## BrendanF (Oct 25, 2021)

As someone who participated in the thread I'm happy to offer my thoughts.  I did not think it was an expression derived from Chess; I didn't think it was a common term like 'McDojo'.  In fairness given the context in which it was provided I thought it pretty self explanatory:

"I am looking to get back into jujutsu... I'm not interested in Grace, or 'Grandmaster Steve' from down the road."

In Japanese and Chinese martial arts culture there is no such thing as 'Grandmaster', as other posters have noted.  So by definition, any 'Grandmaster Steve' claiming to teach traditional Japanese jujutsu.. is going to be essentially a snake oil merchant.

There have been several threads on most fora over the years discussing the misuse of terminology, from the misappropriation of 'O-sensei' to mean something other than 'the older teacher here..', to 'Soke', and my particular favourite - 'Sigung' being interpreted to mean 'Grandmaster'.

So who was that term referring to?  Short of an explanation from the OP, I continue to think it means someone who is claiming to be something they are not.

>What makes one an 'authentic grand master'?<
Given that I don't believe it to be an appropriate translation... I don't think there is such a thing.

>Does a person have to come from an authentic lineage and inherit the Grand Master title from the last Grand Master?<  
I suppose.. if you say so?  By that I mean, if you are ascribing yourself an invented title, what is to stop you from inventing your own traditions around the title?

>Does that mean Prof Helio Gracie and Prof Jigoro Kano are both "Grand Master Steve's"?<
Did they ever call themselves 'Grandmaster'?  In Kano's case.. no.  He was the founder and shihan of Kodokan Judo, and had earned senior licenses in Kito ryu and Tenjin Shinyo ryu... no mention of 'Grandmaster'.  I'm unsure of the terminology used in BJJ, but of course they are entitled to invent their own titles, and traditions around them.. when they invented their own art.

>Does that mean GM Edmund K. Parker is a "Grand Master Steve"?<
If you think it does (I do).

>Does that mean Miyamoto Musashi is also a "Grand Master Steve" (coming from peasant and non Samurai lineage).<
He wasn't from 'peasant' or 'non samurai lineage'.  His father was a famous martial artist.  And again... nowhere did he call himself 'Grandmaster Musashi'.

>surely, if you go back far enough in any style, there has always been a "Grand Master Steve" at the very beginning of each style.<
Yep.  But there's a difference when that individual was in fact a group of individuals who were involved in the martial context the art they created is purported to relate to.  In other words, it's different when 'Grandmaster Steve' is in fact a 15th Century warrior who was documented to have participated in battles and multiple duels.



			Soke: Historical Incarnations of a Title and its Entitlements


----------



## Dirty Dog (Oct 25, 2021)

MA systems that have ranks also tend to have titles of various sorts that go along with them. In our MDK system, 4th Dan is Master. 7th Dan is Grandmaster. At least that's the theory. I don't think I've ever heard anyone in our system us a title for themselves. I've certainly never introduced myself by anything other than my name.
What makes someone a legitimate Grand Master? Being awarded the corresponding rank by their organization. Pretty simple.
There are also those who self-promote. Are they legit? Maybe, but I tend to be somewhat skeptical about these ranks. But it doesn't really matter. Not my school, not my problem.


----------



## Steve (Oct 25, 2021)

Bill Mattocks said:


> The term comes from chess, which has rigid definitions of who is and isn't one. Likewise certain fraternal societies. I have been a Deputy Grand Master of one of the latter, although I no longer am a member.
> 
> With regard to martial arts, there are no universal standards of any sort. Anyone may call themselves anything.


This is the first time I've heard this.  I'm very curious to learn more about the connection between chess and martial arts.  Can you point me to where you heard this very interesting bit of trivia?  

I agree with your comments about standards.  Chess has a huge advantage over non-competitive styles.  If you're a Chess GrandMaster, you've earned that title based on your performance against others.


----------



## caped crusader (Oct 25, 2021)

Xue Sheng said:


> There are no grandmasters in Chinese martial arts.....just teachers...anyone calling themselves grandmaster is just doing it because they decided they were or for purposes of making money


I know a guy who made up his own System. Had just thrown a few bits here and there from other Systems. Suddenly he was a Great Grandmaster.  His Belt was red & black if I remember correctly. However speaking to Dan Grades from around my area at a budo Gala...they all laughed at him.
His Club or school soon lost respect and I heard some stories about the guy  that were shocking.


----------



## Buka (Oct 25, 2021)

I was in a martial art supply store many years ago, I was wearing a martial art sweatshirt. Another customer asked me about our school. He then introduced himself to me as Grandmaster so and so. He might have been twenty five years old.

Anytime I ever saw him again I addressed him as Young Master Much Faster.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Oct 25, 2021)

Buka said:


> I was in a martial art supply store many years ago, I was wearing a martial art sweatshirt. Another customer asked me about our school. He then introduced himself to me as Grandmaster so and so. He might have been twenty five years old.
> 
> Anytime I ever saw him again I addressed him as Young Master Much Faster.



Once tried to correct a person in Chinese martial arts, who is on the seminar circuit, and does distance training in various styles of CMA, who calls himself Sigung.... and no I will not name him...... but h e was using Sigung as Grand Master....first I started with there are no grand masters in CMA, if you are talking to Chinese martial artists....that is, unless they have a student who is a westerner, then they might use "Grand Master" for the western audience. That of course flew over his head....then I said "But regardless of that, Sigung does not mean grand master, it means teachers teacher...so you are saying, with that title, you taught your teacher who then taught you." He responded with all sorts of nonsensical reasons for using the title and that I did not understand that at his level with his background he was using it properly.... I responded with, you can't change the meaning of a word, ion another language, just to impress those who don't know just so you can sound impressive....to which he once again responded with "Well you just don't understand how I use the Chinese"....To which I responded..."I understand you're using it wrong...Huaquan Xui Tui"....I walked away..... so if I ever see him again I will make sure to call him Sigung Huaquan Xui Tui


----------



## Jusroc (Oct 25, 2021)

Hello. Thanks for replying to my post, and just to clarify, I, no way claim to be a Grand Master, or even a master. I was just asking a question that I thought was interesting.

I am what I am, an individual with experience in various areas of the martial arts. Some experiences I have had have been good (and painful at the same time), and other experiences have lead me to my own opinions and conclusions, which i will keep to myself.

Anyway, i don't think my OP gave the impression that I, myself wanted to set myself up as a GM.
I asked the question because i don't know the answer.

Anyway. I find the Grand Master term / phenomena quiet interesting. Haven met several people who were known by the Grand Master term. Later on, I now reflect on what all this means, if anything.

I read in the history of some of the Japanese Ju Jitsu Schools, that before the era people were award belts.  people were instead awarded certificates to teach by their Sensei. 

Later on, I believe Prof Jigoro Kano introduced the Kyu Grade idea and the black belt standard.
Which I believe was developed from his influence as an educator as a profession, introducing the kyu grade and black belt system as an incentive to help people focus on learning, as well as rewarding students who had achieved competency. 

According to legend, this kyu / black belt system standard was taken from the grade system for people who were learning to swim. A system that was adopted by loads of other martial arts.

I am not sure where the idea of creating different levels of black belt came from, although I am aware that Prof Jigoro Kano did promote some to 10th Dan grade in his life time. So, perhaps that also was an invention of Prof Kano. Any one know the true story behind Dan Grades?...

GM Ed K Parker had the title Grand Master, although i do not know if others gave him this title or he gave it to himself. He was the founder of his system of karate, which explained was a hybrid martial art system and different to traditional karate systems, as it was developed from his experience as a street fighter on the streets of Honolulu.

Perhaps his title was taken from the Freemason standard. Which was and still is very popular in the US.
It would also explain why GM Parker also used the word Degree instead of Dan. Although this may also be due to GM Ed Parker being a graduate with a degree. I can not say (perhaps i will ask one of the 9th dan's i know the next time i meet them in the street).

From what I know about GM Ed Parker's lineage, he was taught by several different teachers before he formulated his own style. Interestingly enough, his lineage came from Japanese and Chinese roots.

James Mitose was one of GM Parker Snr's first teachers. James Mitose was a Japanese American who brought Kosho-Ryu Kenpo Jiu Jitsu to America from Japan.

Later on, GM Parker, also learnt Kenpo from William Chow, another student of James Mitose, who received his black belt from Mitose.

Well, I still don't really know who introduced the term Grand Master, nor know what it means.
Perhaps Head Master is its equal.

I think that GM Ed K Parker must have been elected to 10th dan gradually over time, as i have books which he has written with photo's of him on the front cover with a lower degree belt.
And I also have feint memories of the earlier seminars that i attended where his belt was not a 10th degree.

What that all means, I do not know.


----------



## john_newman (Oct 25, 2021)

Don't compare Bruce lee with any other.
He's the best... (still living in our hearts)


----------



## lklawson (Oct 25, 2021)

Bill Mattocks said:


> The term comes from chess, which has rigid definitions of who is and isn't one. Likewise certain fraternal societies. I have been a Deputy Grand Master of one of the latter, although I no longer am a member.
> 
> With regard to martial arts, there are no universal standards of any sort. Anyone may call themselves anything.


With regard to martial arts, Fencing has Maestro ranks with fairly well documented requirements and many of the modern shooting sports, including those which attempt to compete within a "self defense" context, (USPSA/IPSC*, *IDPA, Glock, etc.) have Master and Grand Master rankings based on competitive rankings.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 25, 2021)

Jusroc said:


> Hello. Thanks for replying to my post, and just to clarify, I, no way claim to be a Grand Master, or even a master. I was just asking a question that I thought was interesting.
> 
> I am what I am, an individual with experience in various areas of the martial arts. Some experiences I have had have been good (and painful at the same time), and other experiences have lead me to my own opinions and conclusions, which i will keep to myself.
> 
> ...


The desire to "rank" is deep seated.  In the Western Civ. tradition, progressive rankings can be easily dated back to the 1500's with England's Company of Masters, which had 4 ranks which roughly paralleled the Guild rankings (or modern Unions), ending in Master.  Ranks were earned with both the equivalent of "time in grade" and a skills test, called "playing the prize," officiated by Masters of the organization.  It was headed by a small set of men called the Ancient Masters, which would could be considered the equivalent of Guild Heads or "Grand Masters."

Prior to that there were martial arts "Masters" in Europe who would teach students, usually for pay.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Steve (Oct 25, 2021)

Xue Sheng said:


> There are no grandmasters in Chinese martial arts.....just teachers...anyone calling themselves grandmaster is just doing it because they decided they were or for purposes of making money


That's really interesting.  My mom has been doing tai chi for a while now... started in her 60s, and I can assure you she has no aspirations to be a competent fighter. 

Because her interests have been entirely health related, and it genuinely seems to be really good for her, I don't spend a lot of time worrying about her instructors.  But I will say her impression is that he is a legitimate grandmaster in tai chi, bagua, and a few other things.  She has also commented that he's the "real deal" and goes back to China periodically.  She also talks about a few others who are "masters" and has over the years explained what they have to do to get the "master" designation.  

Ultimately, I don't worry about it much, because she's well into her 70s now and is very fit, both strong and flexible.   My point in bringing it up is that I appreciate your comment because it has always seemed to me that the grandmaster stuff is baked into CMA in particular.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Oct 25, 2021)

Steve said:


> That's really interesting.  My mom has been doing tai chi for a while now... started in her 60s, and I can assure you she has no aspirations to be a competent fighter.
> 
> Because her interests have been entirely health related, and it genuinely seems to be really good for her, I don't spend a lot of time worrying about her instructors.  But I will say her impression is that he is a legitimate grandmaster in tai chi, bagua, and a few other things.  She has also commented that he's the "real deal" and goes back to China periodically.  She also talks about a few others who are "masters" and has over the years explained what they have to do to get the "master" designation.
> 
> Ultimately, I don't worry about it much, because she's well into her 70s now and is very fit, both strong and flexible.   My point in bringing it up is that I appreciate your comment because it has always seemed to me that the grandmaster stuff is baked into CMA in particular.



I'm glad it is helping her, and I am not surprised, and I am glad the guy is the real deal. But the fact remains, there are no Grand Masters in China. It is a term used to impress westerners and used by westerners to sound impressive. One Chinese martial artist from mainland calls another grand master to his face, the better be friend or a fight is about to happen because he just called him a fake. 

However the use of "Grandmaster" by your mothers teacher, in America, does not put his skill in question, just his usage in question as to why he is using it. 

My taijiquan shifu was born and raised in China. Trained in China by Tung Ying Chieh, who was a student of Yang Chengfu. My teacher will not allow anyone to call him grandmaster, because as he says, there are no Grandmasters in China (also got that from my wife so both south and north China are covered there) his teacher was not a grandmaster, he never refers to Yang Chengfu as Grandmaster, only as Sigung (Shigung, aka teacher's teacher) and he will not refer to his teacher as such. He is, as his teacher was, Shifu that is all. And to most people use his first name. 

Chen Zhenglei (19th generation Chen family Taijiquan), in China is Shifu (sifu) or Chen Shifu, not Grandmaster. He may be called that in the west, I do not know his thoughts on that, but he did refer to another Chinese teacher, who was teaching all sorts of things that he learned from DVD while claiminig to have learned them in China, by saying "He must be a Grand Masters, since he teachers so many styles" It was not a compliment and it was only said in Chinese... From that point on he referred to him as a dirty businessman. He also visited this teacher, prior to this lunch I was at, and had told him to stop claiming lineage to his family since he had none, the claim was removed from the mans website. 

Also trained Xingyiquan with a very skilled Taijiquan, Baguazhang, Xingyiquan shifu from China who also does not use the title of Grandmaster, even though he is now based in the USA.

There use to be a Chinese martial arts website for a teacher based in China. Interesting thing, in the English translation of his page, he was a grandmaster. On the Chinese page there was no mention of Grandmaster at all

The title of Grandmaster is not used in Chinese martial arts by natives of China, unless there are westerners involved.


----------



## Steve (Oct 25, 2021)

Xue Sheng said:


> I'm glad it is helping her, and I am not surprised, and I am glad the guy is the real deal. But the fact remains, there are no Grand Masters in China. It is a term used to impress westerners and used by westerners to sound impressive. One Chinese martial artist from mainland calls another grand master to his face, the better be friend or a fight is about to happen because he just called him a fake.



Just to be clear, I don't know if he's legit or not... though I lean toward not.  My point is, I hold my tongue because I can't argue with how good it is for her.  



Xue Sheng said:


> However the use of "Grandmaster" by your mothers teacher, in America, does not put his skill in question, just his usage in question as to why he is using it.


Yes.  And I hope it's clear that I wasn't disputing anything you said.  I honestly had never heard this.  For whatever reason, I always thought the GM stuff actually came from China and not vice versa.


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 25, 2021)

Just to add to the argument, an experienced electrician who has been through the journeyman school is often referred to as a Master Electrician. This is a 10-12 year journey. 
If a MA'ist has similar credentials (there are several metrics) and the salutation is, at the very least, proffered I see nothing wrong with it. Time is a Big factor to me.


----------



## WaterGal (Oct 25, 2021)

Jusroc said:


> I am not sure where the idea of creating different levels of black belt came from, although I am aware that Prof Jigoro Kano did promote some to 10th Dan grade in his life time. So, perhaps that also was an invention of Prof Kano. Any one know the true story behind Dan Grades?...



My understanding is that the 1st-10th dan rank system was borrowed from the game Go, which, much like chess, has a ranking system for players.


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 25, 2021)

WaterGal said:


> My understanding is that the 1st-10th dan rank system was borrowed from the game Go, which, much like chess, has a ranking system for players.


Once again, a very good reason why this site needs to bring the informative button back. I have neither heard of the game Go or that it may be where the Dan belt system originated from.


----------



## john_newman (Oct 26, 2021)

dvcochran said:


> Just to add to the argument, an experienced electrician who has been through the journeyman school is often referred to as a Master Electrician. This is a 10-12 year journey.
> If a MA'ist has similar credentials (there are several metrics) and the salutation is, at the very least, proffered I see nothing wrong with it. Time is a Big factor to me.


Agree with you!!


----------



## clfsean (Oct 28, 2021)

In CMA ... Sifu/Shifu is top of the game. No need to blustered up nonsense from the Western mind & needs. 

Even people I know here in Japan that have Shihan credentialing along with the extended designations like Renshi/Kyoshi/Hanshi ... they all just go by Sensei on the floor. That is volumes by itself.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 28, 2021)

dvcochran said:


> Once again, a very good reason why this site needs to bring the informative button back. I have neither heard of the game Go or that it may be where the Dan belt system originated from.


It is a wonderful game, and the dan system is very useful for it. They've also got a kyu system, though I'm not 100% sure that's where judo got the kyu idea from (it makes sense that it would, i just have not heard people discuss those origins before).


----------



## seasoned (Oct 28, 2021)

In martial arts there are NO "masters", of anything, only students. Time spent and maturity with a huge dose of humility, will offer you the opportunity to teach other what you have learned and earned, through blood sweat and tears..... 
Years ago as a white belt I asked my Sensei who would win in a real fight the boxer or the martial artist......he said "the humble one" because the other one is to busy talking....


----------



## Steve (Oct 28, 2021)

seasoned said:


> In martial arts there are NO "masters", of anything, only students. Time spent and maturity with a huge dose of humility, will offer you the opportunity to teach other what you have learned and earned, through blood sweat and tears.....
> Years ago as a white belt I asked my Sensei who would win in a real fight the boxer or the martial artist......he said "the humble one" because the other one is to busy talking....


LOL.  Tell that to Muhammed Ali.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 28, 2021)

While many people referred to my sigung James Wing Woo as GM,(mostly a sect of kenpo/kempo) none of us that actually trained with him ever called him anything except Sifu Woo. He only referred to himself as Jim. I couldn’t have more respect for him, and my Sifu, Paul Gale. Neither of them had any tolerance for bs titles. Sifu Woo would say “always be a student, so that you keep learning.” He would just say most of the “masters” aren’t really capable of doing anything anyway, and a belt is for holding up your pants.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 28, 2021)

seasoned said:


> In martial arts there are NO "masters", of anything, only students. Time spent and maturity with a huge dose of humility, will offer you the opportunity to teach other what you have learned and earned, through blood sweat and tears.....
> Years ago as a white belt I asked my Sensei who would win in a real fight the boxer or the martial artist......he said "the humble one" because the other one is to busy talking....


I appreciate the sentiment.  But I kinda don't agree.  In the western tradition, the term is applied very much in the same way that "master" is applied in a Union.  It represents a certain demonstrated skill, knowledge, and ability, documented by time, and skills tests & benchmarks.  To say that there are no "masters" in martial arts might be akin to asserting that there is no such thing as a "Master Carpenter" or a "Master Electrician."  I'm quite confident that the Carpenter's and Electrician's Unions would take exception to the notion.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Urban Trekker (Oct 28, 2021)

There's a taboo behind calling anyone "master" in the English language, for reasons we're all fully aware of.

I don't know of any arts that officially use such titles "master" and "grandmaster," but I'm sure they're exist.  And I'm also sure that there are people who practice those very arts that will go around saying that "no one is a master."


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 28, 2021)

lklawson said:


> I appreciate the sentiment.  But I kinda don't agree.  In the western tradition, the term is applied very much in the same way that "master" is applied in a Union.  It represents a certain demonstrated skill, knowledge, and ability, documented by time, and skills tests & benchmarks.  To say that there are no "masters" in martial arts might be akin to asserting that there is no such thing as a "Master Carpenter" or a "Master Electrician."  I'm quite confident that the Carpenter's and Electrician's Unions would take exception to the notion.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


I think it comes down to whether you have skill AND humility, or you just start calling yourself a title. When Sifu Woo passed away he had students that had been training with him for over 40 years. They continue to run his Kwoon 6 years later, none call themselves Sifu. Several are very skilled martial artists and quite competent teachers. Similarly, When my Sifu passed away, I and several other long term students took over running our school and teaching. I have been training almost 25 years, teaching for 7 years, and have yet to wear any title at all. I don’t see any value in it. It doesnt mean anything at all necessarily. Call yourself captain or general or grand poobah for all I care.


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 28, 2021)

lklawson said:


> I appreciate the secntiment.  But I kinda don't agree.  In the western tradition, the term is applied very much in the same way that "master" is applied in a Union.  It represents a certain demonstrated skill, knowledge, and ability, documented by time, and skills tests & benchmarks.  To say that there are no "masters" in martial arts might be akin to asserting that there is no such thing as a "Master Carpenter" or a "Master Electrician."  I'm quite confident that the Carpenter's and Electrician's Unions would take exception to the notion.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


Fully agree but I believed @seasoned was saying it philosophically, which I also agree with. Once a person stops learning, or at least striving to learn they will regress.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 28, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> There's a taboo behind calling anyone "master" in the English language, for reasons we're all fully aware of.
> 
> I don't know of any arts that officially use such titles "master" and "grandmaster," but I'm sure they're exist.  And I'm also sure that there are people who practice those very arts that will go around saying that "no one is a master."


I am not sure that is as universal as is implied here.  There are countless examples, in the English language, in the U.S., of people being referred to as "master," to represent an attained skill level or rank.  This ranges from the common and utilitarian, such as "Master Sergeant," "Master Chief," "Master of Ceremonies," "Master at Arms," "Master Carpenter," and "Range Master," to the fictional, silly, and whimsical, such as when the Marvel MCU movies character Ancient One refers to various sorcerers as "Master [name]."

It's dead common and shows up in the English language all the time, even in martial arts.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 28, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> I think it comes down to whether you have skill AND humility, or you just start calling yourself a title. When Sifu Woo passed away he had students that had been training with him for over 40 years. They continue to run his Kwoon 6 years later, none call themselves Sifu. Several are very skilled martial artists and quite competent teachers. Similarly, When my Sifu passed away, I and several other long term students took over running our school and teaching. I have been training almost 25 years, teaching for 7 years, and have yet to wear any title at all. I don’t see any value in it. It doesnt mean anything at all necessarily. Call yourself captain or general or grand poobah for all I care.


You don't have to be humble to be good at what you do, and that includes practicing and teaching martial arts.  With utterances such as "I am the greatest!" and "Float like a butterfly; sting like a bee," Muhammad Ali wasn't particularly humble. The man had his own cartoon for cry'n out loud.  But he was freaking *good*.

But being humble usually makes it nicer for the students.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Oily Dragon (Oct 28, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> There's a taboo behind calling anyone "master" in the English language, for reasons we're all fully aware of.
> 
> I don't know of any arts that officially use such titles "master" and "grandmaster," but I'm sure they're exist.  And I'm also sure that there are people who practice those very arts that will go around saying that "no one is a master."


It's for this reason I refer to none of my kung fu teachers as "master".  I don't want to give them the wrong impression, like I want them to tie me up.  Sifu/Sigung are fine and pleasantly traditional.

But in reality, it's not that difficult to master a skill.  Time and effort and discipline.  So everyone can be a master.

Whether or not you call yourself a master, or others do, is the key difference between true mastery of a subject and self-imagining as a master.  People seek out masters all the time (like the master electrician or the master chef).  But if you're gonna call yourself a master chef, you better be able to show off your cooking chops.

I don't ever want to be considered a master of kung fu.  Too much burden, and far happier just being a disciple with more work to do.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Oct 28, 2021)

Case in point, Bruce Leroy.

He had the training, the skills, and by the end of the movie, he had the Glow.

But when Sho Nuff asks him "Who's the master" the final time, Bruce doesn't say "I am" because he just thinks that.  He says it because his own sifu had told him that at the beginning.  It took the whole movie for him to realize it.

When your teacher tells you you're a master, go with it.  "When the student is ready, the master will appear".


----------



## Steve (Oct 28, 2021)

Oily Dragon said:


> But if you're gonna call yourself a master chef, you better be able to show off your cooking chops.


I don't know.  If there was more of this in some martial arts styles, those styles would be better.  When folks who have never been in a fight speak with authority about what a "real" fight entails, it would be nice for them to in some way back those statements up with more than arrogance.


----------



## Urban Trekker (Oct 28, 2021)

lklawson said:


> I am not sure that is as universal as is implied here.  There are countless examples, in the English language, in the U.S., of people being referred to as "master," to represent an attained skill level or rank.  This ranges from the common and utilitarian, such as "Master Sergeant," "Master Chief," "Master of Ceremonies," "Master at Arms," "Master Carpenter," and "Range Master," to the fictional, silly, and whimsical, such as when the Marvel MCU movies character Ancient One refers to various sorcerers as "Master [name]."
> 
> It's dead common and shows up in the English language all the time, even in martial arts.
> 
> ...


Understood, I but I said calling someone "master."  As in using it as a term of address.

I've served in the Navy, but I'm retired Air Force.  The rank of Master Chief you gave is a good example of what I'll talk about.  The full name of that rank is "Master Chief Petty Officer."  Notice how, as a form of address, it's shortened to "Master Chief" and *not *simply "Master."

You'll find this to be the case in all branches of the military, but there is a slight exception in the Air Force: in informal settings, the rank of Master Sergeant is sometimes referred to as "master" in casual discussion, but only when referring to it in the third person.  For example "I know her.  She got promoted to 'master' last week."  But it's never used as a form of address.  Either the full rank, or just "Sergeant."  The Marine Corps, on the other hand, always requires the full rank.

Interesting thing about the Air Force:  For Chief Master Sergeant, "Chief" has always been used for short.  For Senior Master Sergeant, the Air Force recently started allowing "Senior" for short, since people were doing it anyway - even when they weren't supposed to.

Will the Air Force ever allow Master Sergeants to be addressed as simply "Master?"  I seriously doubt it.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Oct 28, 2021)

Steve said:


> I don't know.  If there was more of this in some martial arts styles, those styles would be better.  When folks who have never been in a fight speak with authority about what a "real" fight entails, it would be nice for them to in some way back those statements up with more than arrogance.


Could you imagine if the culinary world was full of self-reported "masters"?  Or worse, the electrician world.  Hiring a wiring guy would be like playing with TNT.

It's as if they figured out this problem long ago...with cookoffs and standards for excellence.

Martial artists who consider themselves above such things, I think we both know how little they contribute.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 28, 2021)

lklawson said:


> You don't have to be humble to be good at what you do, and that includes practicing and teaching martial arts.  With utterances such as "I am the greatest!" and "Float like a butterfly; sting like a bee," Muhammad Ali wasn't particularly humble. The man had his own cartoon for cry'n out loud.  But he was freaking *good*.
> 
> But being humble usually makes it nicer for the students.
> 
> ...


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 28, 2021)

I loved Muhammad Ali. I don’t love braggarts in general, but will make a rare exception if/when people prove it. That is, however, exceedingly rare. Most times it’s just hot air and paper tigers.  There is always somebody better, maybe you won’t meet him for a while, but he is out there.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 28, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> There is always somebody better


No argument there.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Urban Trekker (Oct 28, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> I loved Muhammad Ali. I don’t love braggarts in general, but will make a rare exception if/when people prove it. That is, however, exceedingly rare. Most times it’s just hot air and paper tigers.  There is always somebody better, maybe you won’t meet him for a while, but he is out there.


I think everyone's problem is with Floyd Mayweather.  The criticism will be that he scores points and runs until he gets the decision.  And, of course, his fans come back with the YDKSAB argument.  Muhammed Ali actually knocked his opponents out, which is why he's more forgivable.


----------



## Steve (Oct 28, 2021)

Oily Dragon said:


> Could you imagine if the culinary world was full of self-reported "masters"?  Or worse, the electrician world.  Hiring a wiring guy would be like playing with TNT.
> 
> It's as if they figured out this problem long ago...with cookoffs and standards for excellence.
> 
> Martial artists who consider themselves above such things, I think we both know how little they contribute.


Agree completely.  I've written probably thousands of words on this topic on this forum.  And yet just the other day I saw someone who has in the past boasted about never having even been in a schoolyard fight talk about what it's like to apply techniques in the chaos of a "real" fight.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 28, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> I think everyone's problem is with Floyd Mayweather.  The criticism will be that he scores points and runs until he gets the decision.  And, of course, his fans come back with the YDKSAB argument.  Muhammed Ali actually knocked his opponents out, which is why he's more forgivable.


Trash talking seems to be ubiquitous in ufc. They have a whole tv show around it.  Conor mcgregor being a good example. I personally don’t care for it. I think it defames and debases people in general, and constitutes the prostitution of the arts. Anyone can be a whore, that is a skill set, but it isn’t something to aspire to In my opinion.


----------



## WaterGal (Oct 28, 2021)

lklawson said:


> I am not sure that is as universal as is implied here.  There are countless examples, in the English language, in the U.S., of people being referred to as "master," to represent an attained skill level or rank.  This ranges from the common and utilitarian, such as "Master Sergeant," "Master Chief," "Master of Ceremonies," "Master at Arms," "Master Carpenter," and "Range Master," to the fictional, silly, and whimsical, such as when the Marvel MCU movies character Ancient One refers to various sorcerers as "Master [name]."
> 
> It's dead common and shows up in the English language all the time, even in martial arts.
> 
> ...



I do think it's worth noting that the real-world examples that you gave were "Master [Some Job Title]" or "Master of [Some Duty]". I think there is a subtle but real distinction between "That's Bill, the master instructor" and "That's Master Bill".


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 28, 2021)

Oily Dragon said:


> Case in point, Bruce Leroy.
> 
> He had the training, the skills, and by the end of the movie, he had the Glow.
> 
> ...


Ironically we were talking about Bruce Leroy during trivia last night!!!


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 28, 2021)

WaterGal said:


> I do think it's worth noting that the real-world examples that you gave were "Master [Some Job Title]" or "Master of [Some Duty]". I think there is a subtle but real distinction between "That's Bill, the master instructor" and "That's Master Bill".


Interesting; can you expand on this thought?


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 28, 2021)

Oily Dragon said:


> Could you imagine if the culinary world was full of self-reported "masters"?  Or worse, the electrician world.  Hiring a wiring guy would be like playing with TNT.
> 
> It's as if they figured out this problem long ago...with cookoffs and standards for excellence.
> 
> Martial artists who consider themselves above such things, I think we both know how little they contribute.


Yep. And I will say it again; The MA's need some sort of certifying medium similar to skilled trade people, professional teachers, engineers, etc... 
Being really good in competition carries a lot of weight but that is only one area for an ever increasing set of metrics.


----------



## BrendanF (Oct 28, 2021)

dvcochran said:


> The MA's need some sort of certifying medium similar to skilled trade people, professional teachers, engineers, etc...
> Being really good in competition carries a lot of weight but that is only one area for an ever increasing set of metrics.



I don't agree.  I think the cultural diversity and breadth of traditions present necessarily means that any attempt to regulate the industry would be farcical.  How would a regulatory body comprised of - presumably - karate, taekwondo, BJJ etc people.. regulate instruction in Mongolian wrestling or savate?  

You going to have someone capable of assessing the merits of instructors of every martial art on the planet?


----------



## WaterGal (Oct 28, 2021)

dvcochran said:


> Interesting; can you expand on this thought?



If someone is a "Master Electrician", "master" is modifying "electrician". It's saying that they have attained some mastery at the work of being an electrician. It's a job title, and specific to that realm. I think that just saying "Master Bill" can imply something broader.


----------



## MadMartigan (Oct 28, 2021)

WaterGal said:


> If someone is a "Master Electrician", "master" is modifying "electrician". It's saying that they have attained some mastery at the work of being an electrician. It's a job title, and specific to that realm. I think that just saying "Master Bill" can imply something broader.


I think I see what you're getting at... and that may be the part rankles so many.

Using the term master to describe the job isn't too offensive to most (ie: master instructor similar to master electrician etc). This simply implies expertise within that skillset. 

The problem lays with those that use the word to invoke fealty from their followers. There are far to many self proclaimed "masters" (and students) who act as though the term confers mastery of all aspects of life / self-defense / spirituality / finances, you name it. 

Unfortunately, the term is more often used for the latter purposes by those wishing to be worshiped as a hero of some kind.

While dvcochran's idea would be nice; with members of the same art unable to agree on how things should be done... how could all the different forms out there possibly do better?


----------



## Buka (Oct 28, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> I loved Muhammad Ali. I don’t love braggarts in general, but will make a rare exception if/when people prove it. That is, however, exceedingly rare. Most times it’s just hot air and paper tigers.  There is always somebody better, maybe you won’t meet him for a while, but he is out there.


I loved him, too. The whole bragging thing was an act, and a damn fine one it was. After winning in the Olympics he was back home and went to a professional wrestling show. Gorgeous George was in the featured bout. George used to come out in a long robe, his hair all permed, sometimes a crown. The boos would be loud, stuff would be thrown at the ring.

If I remember correctly, I believe Ali (Clay at the time) was there with a relative, maybe his dad, maybe an uncle. That relative turned to young Cassius and said, "Can you imagine having all these people booing you?"

Clay replied "Can you imagine all these people paying good money to come out and boo you?"

And a star was born.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 28, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> I think everyone's problem is with Floyd Mayweather.  The criticism will be that he scores points and runs until he gets the decision.  And, of course, his fans come back with the YDKSAB argument.  Muhammed Ali actually knocked his opponents out, which is why he's more forgivable.





Buka said:


> I loved him, too. The whole bragging thing was an act, and a damn fine one it was. After winning in the Olympics he was back home and went to a professional wrestling show. Gorgeous George was in the featured bout. George used to come out in a long robe, his hair all permed, sometimes a crown. The boos would be loud, stuff would be thrown at the ring.
> 
> If I remember correctly, I believe Ali (Clay at the time) was there with a relative, maybe his dad, maybe an uncle. That relative turned to young Cassius and said, "Can you imagine having all these people booing you?"
> 
> ...


All war is deception. -Sun Tzu


----------



## Dirty Dog (Oct 28, 2021)

BrendanF said:


> I don't agree.  I think the cultural diversity and breadth of traditions present necessarily means that any attempt to regulate the industry would be farcical.  How would a regulatory body comprised of - presumably - karate, taekwondo, BJJ etc people.. regulate instruction in Mongolian wrestling or savate?
> 
> You going to have someone capable of assessing the merits of instructors of every martial art on the planet?


Sure. We already do. It's the people senior to them within their organization.


----------



## BrendanF (Oct 28, 2021)

Dirty Dog said:


> Sure. We already do. It's the people senior to them within their organization.



Of course.  But there is no centralised body regulating those individuals.  A cursory look at martial arts organisations in China and Japan can demonstrate the difficulties involved, when the source arts are nearly innumerable and independent.

My point being it maybe possible to organise and regulate commercially practised arts, even slightly more obscure ones such as Mongolian wrestling or savate, but it's damn near impossible to organise or impose regulations on individuals privately practising or teaching an obscure family art.  In those cases, the people _are_ the organisation - there isn't anyone senior to them.

I'm reminded of one of the more well known American koryu teachers; his school - his teacher - did not join either of the two major 'Nihon Kobudo' organisations in Japan, effectively saying "why would I want to join an organisation filled with my former enemies?".


----------



## Oily Dragon (Oct 28, 2021)

Steve said:


> Agree completely.  I've written probably thousands of words on this topic on this forum.  And yet just the other day I saw someone who has in the past boasted about never having even been in a schoolyard fight talk about what it's like to apply techniques in the chaos of a "real" fight.


A real fight ends one of three ways.

You walk away wondering how you won.

Or you wake up later, and told you lost.

Or you die.


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 29, 2021)

WaterGal said:


> If someone is a "Master Electrician", "master" is modifying "electrician". It's saying that they have attained some mastery at the work of being an electrician. It's a job title, and specific to that realm. I think that just saying "Master Bill" can imply something broader.


In the context of skilled trades, being qualified as a Master is much broader than . 'modifying' something. The time investment, education required, and work history is what enables the title. 
To me, that is very parallel to being called a Master in martial arts. 

I am still trying to understand the "Master Bill" reference. Are you saying Bill is a hack? 
Or that Bill, the master instructor is more akin to the supervisor title and Master Bill more honorific (Sa Bum Nim vs. Kwan Jang Nim)?


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 29, 2021)

BrendanF said:


> I don't agree.  I think the cultural diversity and breadth of traditions present necessarily means that any attempt to regulate the industry would be farcical.  How would a regulatory body comprised of - presumably - karate, taekwondo, BJJ etc people.. regulate instruction in Mongolian wrestling or savate?
> 
> You going to have someone capable of assessing the merits of instructors of every martial art on the planet?


It could not be 'for the whole planet'. More like national, federal, and state regulatory agencies.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Trash talking seems to be ubiquitous in ufc. They have a whole tv show around it.  Conor mcgregor being a good example. I personally don’t care for it. I think it defames and debases people in general, and constitutes the prostitution of the arts. Anyone can be a whore, that is a skill set, but it isn’t something to aspire to In my opinion.


Trash talking has always been part of fighting.  It's standard fare in boxing and wrestling and can be documented back to the earliest periods of mankind.  There are texts of Egyptians Pharos trash talking their enemies and of the Nubians trash talking the Egyptians.  My favorite is when the English broadsword fencers were trash talking the new continental rapier systems as being frenchy and sissy.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

Oily Dragon said:


> Case in point, Bruce Leroy.
> 
> He had the training, the skills, and by the end of the movie, he had the Glow.
> 
> ...


Always was one of my favorite movies.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

dvcochran said:


> Yep. And I will say it again; The MA's need some sort of certifying medium similar to skilled trade people, professional teachers, engineers, etc...
> Being really good in competition carries a lot of weight but that is only one area for an ever increasing set of metrics.


There are a bunch of them.  There's Kukkikwon, ITF, United States Judo Association, the Japanese Aikido Association, the Japan Karate Association, United States Judo Federation, the All England Judo Federation, the American Knife Fighting Congress, and the list goes on and on and on.

Or were you suggesting that the American Knife Fighting Congress guys should be setting standards for the Wing Chun Federation?

We already have certifying bodies for the various martial arts similar to skilled trade organizations.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

WaterGal said:


> If someone is a "Master Electrician", "master" is modifying "electrician". It's saying that they have attained some mastery at the work of being an electrician. It's a job title, and specific to that realm. I think that just saying "Master Bill" can imply something broader.


And a master of XYZ martial art is any different?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Urban Trekker (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> Trash talking has always been part of fighting.  It's standard fare in boxing and wrestling and can be documented back to the earliest periods of mankind.  There are texts of Egyptians Pharos trash talking their enemies and of the Nubians trash talking the Egyptians.  My favorite is when the English broadsword fencers were trash talking the new continental rapier systems as being frenchy and sissy.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


Jokes aside, I can't imagine combat sports *without* trash talking.  Any fighter who has trash-talking ability will want to use it to gain a psychological advantage over their opponent by reducing their confidence, intimidating them, or goading them into an uncontrollable rage so that they lose focus during the match.  Seems pretty standard to me.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

BrendanF said:


> Of course.  But there is no centralised body regulating those individuals.


Sure there is.  Very nearly every martial arts school is a member of a larger certifying organization.  It is fairly standard.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

Oily Dragon said:


> A real fight ends one of three ways.
> 
> You walk away wondering how you won.
> 
> ...


Or you walk away knowing exactly why you won, what preparations, training and skills were instrumental, and why your opponent lost.

Not every fight involves two untrained opponents who have no idea if what they're doing will work or why.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> Jokes aside, I can't imagine combat sports *without* trash talking.  Any fighter who has trash-talking ability will want to use it to gain a psychological advantage over their opponent by reducing their confidence, intimidating them, or goading them into an uncontrollable rage so that they lose focus during the match.  Seems pretty standard to me.


It is apparently one of the key functions of the Maori's haka.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## wolfeyes2323 (Oct 29, 2021)

Not the Chess you are thinking of,   the game of GO,  which is a strategy game that requires the same depth of mind to play.    IMO  Grand Master in MA is a misnomer ,  it is more like a professor as distinguished from teacher.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> Trash talking has always been part of fighting.  It's standard fare in boxing and wrestling and can be documented back to the earliest periods of mankind.  There are texts of Egyptians Pharos trash talking their enemies and of the Nubians trash talking the Egyptians.  My favorite is when the English broadsword fencers were trash talking the new continental rapier systems as being frenchy and sissy.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


Again, I personally don’t care for it. I grew up fighting and seeing fights in my neighborhood. I have seen people maimed for life, I have seen people die. Its not always a tv show. There is a big difference between sport fights and street fights. I see a lot of people talk about fighting on here, and it is clear to me that most of them live in fantasyland about what that really means.  It means you debase yourself. It means you debase another human being. You can’t take that back. To my mind, boasting, trash talking, etc. is a way to convince themselves of the courage they don’t really have. So when I see that I usually interpret it as fear and weakness of character.  As previously mentioned, there are a few rare exceptions, Muhammed Ali for one.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

Oily Dragon said:


> A real fight ends one of three ways.
> 
> You walk away wondering how you won.
> 
> ...


Nonsense.


----------



## Urban Trekker (Oct 29, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Again, I personally don’t care for it. I grew up fighting and seeing fights in my neighborhood. I have seen people maimed for life, I have seen people die. Its not always a tv show. There is a big difference between sport fights and street fights. I see a lot of people talk about fighting on here, and it is clear to me that most of them live in fantasyland about what that really means.


In the short time I've been here on MT, I've seen a dozen or so guys come on here telling everyone else that they don't know what they're talking about, "so here's the real deal."

I try not to engage it, but please understand: there are plenty of people here who grew up in the ghetto, live in high crime areas, and have also done what they've needed to survive.  Plenty of people come here thinking they're the only one.  That's not going to stop, but I really wish it would.



Wing Woo Gar said:


> It means you debase yourself. It means you debase another human being. You can’t take that back. *To my mind, boasting, trash talking, etc. is a way to convince themselves of the courage they don’t really have.* So when I see that I usually interpret it as fear and weakness of character.  As previously mentioned, there are a few rare exceptions, Muhammed Ali for one.


I don't know where you're from.  But I grew up in the projects myself and having lived in many other impoverished areas, I know first hand that trash talking has always been a fact of life in places where fights occur.  And for the same reasons I stated in my previous comments.

And when it comes to real fights, you said that trash talking is a way for someone to convince themselves of the courage they don't really have.  And you know what?  Sometimes that's true.  And you know something else?  There is absolutely *nothing* wrong with that.

When I was young, I've used my trash talking abilities to get dudes who wanted to fight me (and who I thought would have beaten me) to back off.  And if that didn't work (I'd say it was 50/50), it helped me muster that courage to go through with it.  It's a concept called "think, do, become" or "acting as if."  And it's never a bad thing.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Oct 29, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Nonsense.


Obviously.

Are you one of those poor folks who log on seeking the truth about fighting?

Don't do that.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Again, I personally don’t care for it. [...] There is a big difference between sport fights and street fights. I see a lot of people talk about fighting on here, and it is clear to me that most of them live in fantasyland about what that really means.


Sometimes there's a difference between "sport" and not, but sometimes there wasn't.  The Romans sure didn't have a problem making "sport fighting" the same thing as "real fighting."    Historically speaking, still, "trash talking" was completely common during the days when "fighting words" actually meant a duel to the death.  Never heard of Hamilton and Burr?




Wing Woo Gar said:


> It means you debase yourself. It means you debase another human being. You can’t take that back. To my mind, boasting, trash talking, etc. is a way to convince themselves of the courage they don’t really have. So when I see that I usually interpret it as fear and weakness of character.


You're certainly free to believe that but the history seems to indicate otherwise.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Oily Dragon (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> Or you walk away knowing exactly why you won, what preparations, training and skills were instrumental, and why your opponent lost.
> 
> Not every fight involves two untrained opponents who have no idea if what they're doing will work or why.
> 
> ...


Fine, there are only 4 possible outcomes.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

Oily Dragon said:


> Fine, there are only 4 possible outcomes.



Win
Lose
Surrender
Both mutually decide to leave the field
Mutual loss (double death)
One runs away
The point is that the whole topic is messy, chaotic, and has a lot of variables which make it silly to try to over-simplify it.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> Win
> Lose
> Surrender
> Both mutually decide to leave the field
> ...


Damn it.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

Oily Dragon said:


> Obviously.
> 
> Are you one of those poor folks who log on seeking the truth about fighting?
> 
> Don't do that.


Please.


----------



## ThatOneCanadian (Oct 29, 2021)

In my opinion, anyone who has been agreed by a large amount of other people to be a "Grandmaster" definitely qualifies as a Grandmaster. In other words, it shouldn't be a rank or achievement but rather something that just _happens_. Take Grandmaster Beaudoin (may he rest in peace) of the WTSDA for example; he achieved his title not just through being elected but by being looked up to by a large amount of people due to his ability.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Oct 29, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Please.


Thank you.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> Sometimes there's a difference between "sport" and not, but sometimes there wasn't.  The Romans sure didn't have a problem making "sport fighting" the same thing as "real fighting."    Historically speaking, still, "trash talking" was completely common during the days when "fighting words" actually meant a duel to the death.  Never heard of Hamilton and Burr?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Look I’m not trying to start anything here. I’m talking about my opinion which is based on my experiences.  I work in surgery. I grew up in the inner city.  My father was a career criminal with an extremely violent nature. I have an opinion on the current culture of martial arts as it stands. I am expressing What I believe to be MOSTLY true MOST of the time.  How many of you have really seen a person maimed or killed in person? How many of you have seen some one die from violence that started as a result of trash talking? Have you had the blood on YOU? I’m talking about being human here. I have known a few tough guys, that’s how I know I’m not one.  I have regrets about some of this stuff, that’s why I think the way I do.  You do you, it’s just my opinion.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

ThatOneSyrian said:


> In my opinion, anyone who has been agreed by a large amount of other people to be a "Grandmaster" definitely qualifies as a Grandmaster.


Like L. Ron Hubbard?  (just because I'm feeling my cheery-oats  )

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> Like L. Ron Hubbard?  (just because I'm feeling my cheery-oats  )
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


Dude deserves the title grandmaster for a lot of things. One of the best at doing what he does.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Look I’m not trying to start anything here. I’m talking about my opinion which is based on my experiences.


Sure.  And it's your opinion.  Your opinion does not have to comport with known history to still be your opinion.  It just means that what you believe may not be historically accurate.



Wing Woo Gar said:


> I work in surgery. I grew up in the inner city.  My father was a career criminal with an extremely violent nature. I have an opinion on the current culture of martial arts as it stands. I am expressing What I believe to be MOSTLY true MOST of the time.  How many of you have really seen a person maimed or killed in person? How many of you have seen some one die from violence that started as a result of trash talking? Have you had the blood on YOU? I’m talking about being human here. I have known a few tough guys, that’s how I know I’m not one.  I have regrets about some of this stuff, that’s why I think the way I do.  You do you, it’s just my opinion.


That all sounds scary but it really doesn't give you any more authority on the subject than anyone else.  Seeing dead bodies and permanent injuries doesn't actually make you an authority on whether or not trash talking is or is not, well, anything at all.


----------



## Urban Trekker (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> Like L. Ron Hubbard?  (just because I'm feeling my cheery-oats  )
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


Good point.  Anyone who's ever taken a leadership course has gone over the "bases of power," and there are between 5 to 9 of them, depending on the model that the particular course follows.

The one being referred to here is called "reverent power," where one is able to assume a leadership role because of their charisma.

I'm personally not very trusting of charismatic people initially, and I tend to watch them very closely in order to decide whether or not they can be trusted.  One thing that's common sense is that charisma does not equal competence and, in my experience, charismatic people use their charisma to get others to overlook their lack of competence.

That said, if I don't agree that a title like "grandmaster" should be conferred by those under a particular person's leadership, I hope everyone understands why.


----------



## ThatOneCanadian (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> Like L. Ron Hubbard?  (just because I'm feeling my cheery-oats  )
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


Not to sound like I'm backpedaling but the word "Grandmaster" doesn't necessarily carry a positive connotation. Case in point: the Austrian painter.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Oct 29, 2021)

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> Dude deserves the title grandmaster for a lot of things. One of the best at doing what he does.


Galactic Overlord was already taken.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> Sure.  And it's your opinion.  Your opinion does not have to comport with known history to still be your opinion.  It just means that what you believe may not be historically accurate.
> 
> 
> That all sounds scary but it really doesn't give you any more authority on the subject than anyone else.  Seeing dead bodies and permanent injuries doesn't actually make you an authority on whether or not trash talking is or is not, well, anything at all.


I never said I had any authority or expertise. Much like you, I do espouse an opinion. You obviously think that trash talk is an essential part of martial arts, and that’s ok. I won’t bother to debate you on this topic, and I won’t trash talk you either.  I hope you find some nugget of value in what I said, it wasn’t meant to insult, or sound as if I think I am an authority on historical trash talk. If you feel I have somehow violated your sensibilitie, then please accept my sincere apology.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> In the short time I've been here on MT, I've seen a dozen or so guys come on here telling everyone else that they don't know what they're talking about, "so here's the real deal."
> 
> I try not to engage it, but please understand: there are plenty of people here who grew up in the ghetto, live in high crime areas, and have also done what they've needed to survive.  Plenty of people come here thinking they're the only one.  That's not going to stop, but I really wish it would.
> 
> ...


Fake it til you make it?


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> Sometimes there's a difference between "sport" and not, but sometimes there wasn't.  The Romans sure didn't have a problem making "sport fighting" the same thing as "real fighting."    Historically speaking, still, "trash talking" was completely common during the days when "fighting words" actually meant a duel to the death.  Never heard of Hamilton and Burr?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I just don’t believe in “fighting words”.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> Good point.  Anyone who's ever taken a leadership course has gone over the "bases of power," and there are between 5 to 9 of them, depending on the model that the particular course follows.
> 
> The one being referred to here is called "reverent power," where one is able to assume a leadership role because of their charisma.
> 
> ...


That's the thing about charismatic people.  If they're half-way good, you don't realize they're using their charisma.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

ThatOneSyrian said:


> Not to sound like I'm backpedaling but the word "Grandmaster" doesn't necessarily carry a positive connotation. Case in point: the Austrian painter.


It was just my way of pointing out that just because a lot of people believe something doesn't mean it's true.  At one point pretty much all of Europe believe that disease was caused by an imbalance of bodily humors.  Feeling sick?  It's probably too much phelgm; better go get some of your blood removed.

Just because a lot of people agree that Mr. Sokitumi is a "Grand Master" doesn't necessarily mean he is. 

And yes, that impacts my beliefs on what ranks in martial arts (and pretty much everything else) actually means.

Should "rank" be by some sort of consensus?  What if everyone is wrong or the majority is misinformed?

Should "rank" be by a certifying body?  What if that certifying body is incompetent, corrupt, or unqualified?

Should "rank" be by accomplishment and/or competitive success?  What if the pool of competitors ability & skill either improves or declines compared to history such as if the pool has either better or worse nutrition, training methods, or genetics (can you really compare the Jack Dempsey to George Foreman?).

In the end, how much does "rank" actually mean?  And if "rank" has very limited meaning, can "Master" and "Grand Master" mean much more?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Urban Trekker (Oct 29, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Fake it til you make it?


That's another way of putting it, but I tend to use that phrase in a different context.  For example, BS'ing your way though an interview for a job you know you're not qualified for, and hoping for the best.

But I know it's another phrase for what I was describing before, though.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> I never said I had any authority or expertise. Much like you, I do espouse an opinion. You obviously think that trash talk is an essential part of martial arts, and that’s ok.


No.  I think that it's a common part and has been since humans first started punching each other in the face.  I don't think its use can be seen as any sort of moral judgment tool or give any particular insight into a person's skill or belief in their own capabilities as it seems that you do.  

Trash talk is just trash talk and it could mean dozens of different things and be used in many different ways from psyching one's self up to psyching out the opponent to entertaining the spectators to a type of ritual.  It's a tool.  You just can't assume that a person doing so is somehow morally bankrupt or doubts their own abilities.  That's myopic.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> I just don’t believe in “fighting words”.


Then it's a good thing that you live in a modern first world country, otherwise a perceived slight could get you in a fight.  Set the Wayback Machine 150 years, or travel to certain other parts of the world, and your belief in whether or not fighting words are real won't matter to the guy stabbing you to death or pummeling your face into pulp.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> Sure.  And it's your opinion.  Your opinion does not have to comport with known history to still be your opinion.  It just means that what you believe may not be historically accurate.
> 
> 
> That all sounds scary but it really doesn't give you any more authority on the subject than anyone else.  Seeing dead bodies and permanent injuries doesn't actually make you an authority on whether or not trash talking is or is not, well, anything at all.





Wing Woo Gar said:


> Fake it til you make it?


I wasn’t telling anybody that they don’t know what they are talking about.  I was expressing an opinion about how I feel about trash talk in general. How it just begets more unnecessary violence, and the reality of that. I do know it’s common, I do know it has historical significance, I do know it is used for many reasons mentioned already.  I was only relating to the conversation from my experiences.  I guess I missed something here, but Sometimes I wonder if people read the comment completely.  I said I was talking about being a human. To me, that’s martial arts. Evolving. Trying to be a better human. You in relationship to yourself, you in relationship to the earth. Take it for what it’s worth, an opinion, nothing more than that.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> No.  I think that it's a common part and has been since humans first started punching each other in the face.  I don't think its use can be seen as any sort of moral judgment tool or give any particular insight into a person's skill or belief in their own capabilities as it seems that you do.
> 
> Trash talk is just trash talk and it could mean dozens of different things and be used in many different ways from psyching one's self up to psyching out the opponent to entertaining the spectators to a type of ritual.  It's a tool.  You just can't assume that a person doing so is somehow morally bankrupt or doubts their own abilities.  That's myopic.
> 
> ...





lklawson said:


> Then it's a good thing that you live in a modern first world country, otherwise a perceived slight could get you in a fight.  Set the Wayback Machine 150 years, or travel to certain other parts of the world, and your belief in whether or not fighting words are real won't matter to the guy stabbing you to death or pummeling your face into pulp.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


I think you misunderstand. I don’t fight over words. I will fight if you attack me, regardless of your reason. You can say anything you want to me, I’ve heard it all. I will not attack someone for saying words. Do you understand what I mean now?


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> No.  I think that it's a common part and has been since humans first started punching each other in the face.  I don't think its use can be seen as any sort of moral judgment tool or give any particular insight into a person's skill or belief in their own capabilities as it seems that you do.
> 
> Trash talk is just trash talk and it could mean dozens of different things and be used in many different ways from psyching one's self up to psyching out the opponent to entertaining the spectators to a type of ritual.  It's a tool.  You just can't assume that a person doing so is somehow morally bankrupt or doubts their own abilities.  That's myopic.
> 
> ...


I think that I can see it any way I want. I think that if you have to psych yourself up then you should train harder. I think that if you need a tool to psych me out then you doubt your ability to defeat me with pure skill. I think that if you depend on that rather than your pure skill you lack a certain moral quality.  It makes you less. You lower yourself. A pity that you can’t see that. Maybe its your myopia.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> Then it's a good thing that you live in a modern first world country, otherwise a perceived slight could get you in a fight.  Set the Wayback Machine 150 years, or travel to certain other parts of the world, and your belief in whether or not fighting words are real won't matter to the guy stabbing you to death or pummeling your face into pulp.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


We don’t need to set it back 150 years, I have been stabbed twice, once with a bottle and once with a knife. I’m not making up some bs story about my imaginary  fights.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> I wasn’t telling anybody that they don’t know what they are talking about.  I was expressing an opinion about how I feel about trash talk in general. How it just begets more unnecessary violence, and the reality of that. I do know it’s common, I do know it has historical significance, I do know it is used for many reasons mentioned already.  I was only relating to the conversation from my experiences.  I guess I missed something here, but Sometimes I wonder if people read the comment completely.  I said I was talking about being a human. To me, that’s martial arts. Evolving. Trying to be a better human. You in relationship to yourself, you in relationship to the earth. Take it for what it’s worth, an opinion, nothing more than that.


Well, we are pretty much polar opposites on our personal opinions of what The Arts of Mars are at their foundational core.  I get it.  I get the "bunnies and light."  Heck, I have a shodan in Aikido (among other certs and ranks).  But the more I studied the way martial arts are taught and presented throughout the world, both today and in history, the more I was convinced that martial arts are, fundamentally, about fighting, being able to hurt or control other people, and preventing them from doing that to you.  I have become convinced that the "self actualization" concept of what martial arts should be is a concept which is only possible in a society safe enough and structured enough to allow it to flourish in such a way.

I'm just not going to agree that you study martial arts "to be a better human" (at least not in the way that I think you mean "better human").  Sure, I agree with the sentiment that "Only a warrior chooses pacifism; others are condemned to it." But the fighting arts aren't about pacifism, they just give you the option to choose it.

But I really do hope it works out for you.  I hope you can find enlightenment or self actualization or whatever it is you're looking for.  I just have a problem when people make pronouncements that I know are inaccurate.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> I think that I can see it any way I want. I think that if you have to psych yourself up then you should train harder.


I didn't say that I need to do it, I said it's a tool that some people can use.



Wing Woo Gar said:


> I think that if you need a tool to psych me out then you doubt your ability to defeat me with pure skill.


Why on earth would someone give up a tool that could help them?  That's silly.  Psychological Warfare and "psyops" are standard fare and I'm amazed that you think they're somehow corrupt.



Wing Woo Gar said:


> I think that if you depend on that rather than your pure skill you lack a certain moral quality.


"Moral quality" doesn't win fights and doesn't keep a face from getting beaten in.  Good tools, tactics, strategy, and training do that.  And sometimes, in some cases, "trash talk" can be a tool to be used.



Wing Woo Gar said:


> It makes you less. You lower yourself. A pity that you can’t see that. Maybe its your myopia.


Well, if making use of a tool is "lowering," if winning the fight, if surviving is "myopic" then OK.

You know what you call the morally superior dead guy?  Dead.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> We don’t need to set it back 150 years, I have been stabbed twice, once with a bottle and once with a knife. I’m not making up some bs story about my imaginary  fights.


Then you should know better then to "not believe" in "fighting words."  Because they seem to believe in you (and want to kill you).


----------



## lklawson (Oct 29, 2021)

Well, this has been fun.  I'm gonna go enjoy my weekend now.  Planning on going to the Ren Fest tomorrow.  It's silly but fun.  Sometimes, for entertainment, I'll go hang out as the booths selling swords and listen to the customers and sales people talk about them as fighting tools.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> Well, this has been fun.  I'm gonna go enjoy my weekend now.  Planning on going to the Ren Fest tomorrow.  It's silly but fun.  Sometimes, for entertainment, I'll go hang out as the booths selling swords and listen to the customers and sales people talk about them as fighting tools.


Sounds fun. Have a great weekend. Thank you for the spirited debate.


----------



## Urban Trekker (Oct 29, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> I think that I can see it any way I want. I think that if you have to psych yourself up then you should train harder. I think that if you need a tool to psych me out then you doubt your ability to defeat me with pure skill. I think that if you depend on that rather than your pure skill you lack a certain moral quality.  It makes you less. You lower yourself. A pity that you can’t see that. Maybe its your myopia.



If we're talking about sports, it's not against the rules.  Your opponent is just as capable of speaking as you are, so it's fair.

If we're talking about a real fight, then fairness shouldn't even be a thought.  You do whatever you have to in order to win.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> I didn't say that I need to do it, I said it's a tool that some people can use.
> 
> 
> Why on earth would someone give up a tool that could help them?  That's silly.  Psychological Warfare and "psyops" are standard fare and I'm amazed that you think they're somehow corrupt.
> ...


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> If we're talking about sports, it's not against the rules.  Your opponent is just as capable of speaking as you are, so it's fair.
> 
> If we're talking about a real fight, then fairness shouldn't even be a thought.  You do whatever you have to in order to win.


I agree that all war is deception.  I agree that anything is fair in a fight. I also believe that one can strive to be better and moral and evolved in spite of those things. I believe that having the choice is a product of martial arts training. I am of the opinion that if it’s only about fighting then we miss the point of training to have the option. I don’t understand what’s wrong with that statement? We all get old, we all become frail. At some point, what we gain physically goes away, what is left? If it was only about fighting then what will I have gained at the later decades of life?


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> If we're talking about sports, it's not against the rules.  Your opponent is just as capable of speaking as you are, so it's fair.
> 
> If we're talking about a real fight, then fairness shouldn't even be a thought.  You do whatever you have to in order to win.


I’m not speaking to whether it’s fair. I couldn’t care less how much an opponent or adversary has to say. That’s part of my point.


----------



## Urban Trekker (Oct 29, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> I’m not speaking to whether it’s fair. I couldn’t care less how much an opponent or adversary has to say. That’s part of my point.



You just contradicted yourself.  All this time today, you've been criticizing the characters of people who engage in trash talk.  Now you don't care?


----------



## Steve (Oct 29, 2021)

lklawson said:


> And a master of XYZ martial art is any different?
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


In my opinion, not much different, though the skillset is much more clearly defined.  When you have a ninja who purports to be a master in self defense, there is a bit of a disconnect.  He may be a master in ninjutsu, but that doesn't mean he can fight or is a master of self defense.

This would be akin to a master electrician presuming to speak with authority on plumbing.  Sure, they're both trades associated with construction, but being a master electrician doesn't magically convey authority in other connected fields.


----------



## Steve (Oct 29, 2021)

Oily Dragon said:


> Fine, there are only 4 possible outcomes.


... and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope!  Amongst our possible outcomes are such elements as fear, surprise.... I'll come in again.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> You just contradicted yourself.  All this time today, you've been criticizing the characters of people who engage in trash talk.  Now you don't care?


I’m saying I am not going to be goaded or psyched out by fighting words.  I don’t care what they say to me or about me. I do find the act to be lacking in character. I wonder if you really understand where I’m coming from here? This is really just a simple thing. If you don’t agree, that’s ok with me. If you want to trash talk me, feel free. I’m making a comment about how it’s not adding anything positive in my opinion. I don’t feel that I need to react with violence to words. Would you kick a barking dog? Are you afraid of barking dogs? Do you feel like saying mean things back to the barking dog will have a Positive effect?


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> You just contradicted yourself.  All this time today, you've been criticizing the characters of people who engage in trash talk.  Now you don't care?


If you want to do that then do it. I don’t care, but I also will judge you on your lack of moral character. I will also assume you lack the ability or the courage to back it up. Of course you are welcome to do as you please, you may also chew with your mouth open and talk while you eat.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Oct 29, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> I’m saying I am not going to be goaded or psyched out by fighting words.  I don’t care what they say to me or about me. I do find the act to be lacking in character. I wonder if you really understand where I’m coming from here? This is really just a simple thing. If you don’t agree, that’s ok with me. If you want to trash talk me, feel free. I’m making a comment about how it’s not adding anything positive in my opinion. I don’t feel that I need to react with violence to words. Would you kick a barking dog? Are you afraid of barking dogs? Do you feel like saying mean things back to the barking dog will have a Positive effect?


Of course I forgot to mention that dogs don’t have morals, so I won’t judge the dog.


----------



## WaterGal (Oct 30, 2021)

dvcochran said:


> In the context of skilled trades, being qualified as a Master is much broader than . 'modifying' something. The time investment, education required, and work history is what enables the title.
> To me, that is very parallel to being called a Master in martial arts.
> 
> I am still trying to understand the "Master Bill" reference. Are you saying Bill is a hack?
> Or that Bill, the master instructor is more akin to the supervisor title and Master Bill more honorific (Sa Bum Nim vs. Kwan Jang Nim)?



The latter. I think the term "master instructor" implies that one has put many years of work into learning to be an instructor, while calling someone "master [name]" is an honorific that's often used for either some kind of spiritual guru, or historically for a person who owned slaves. So I think it's understandable that people feel uncomfortable with it.


----------



## WaterGal (Oct 30, 2021)

lklawson said:


> And a master of XYZ martial art is any different?
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


I've never heard a master electrician or master plumber be addressed as "Master So-and-So".


----------



## Dirty Dog (Oct 30, 2021)

WaterGal said:


> I've never heard a master electrician or master plumber be addressed as "Master So-and-So".


People will certainly say "I am a Master Electrician" without there being any expectation that you'll call them "Master Volt". This is, I think, a relatively new thing. There have certainly been times in our history when a Master Carpenter would have expected to be called "Master Nailer".


----------



## ThatOneCanadian (Oct 30, 2021)

I'm gonna add to this discussion and say that anyone can call themselves a professional, and anyone who actually is a professional at something isn't necessarily a competent human being. Someone calling themselves a Grandmaster is not just a completely subjective thing but even if for whatever reason they have achieved Yoda levels of competency in their art, they are still prone to mistakes. Look at John C. Kim, a skilled, widely-heralded martial artist who ended up being a fraud. If you wanna go beyond martial arts, look at Elizabeth Holmes, a highly-educated individual who ended up being probably the most incompetent, dim-witted psychological manipulator in human history. Despite pretending to be a high authority in her field of study, she barely got anywhere before being called out for her rubbish.

This is why I don't like the title "Grandmaster"; it's a pompous, narcissistic way that an ordinary person will use to try to assert themselves above others. The only way that I will respect a highly-proficient individual is if they are humble, doing away with these ridiculous titles, and instead show competency through their actions. The moment someone tries to pull a Snoke on me and refer to themselves as Supreme Grandmaster Ruler Overlord Commander-in-Chief Admiral General Deluxe is the moment I refuse to put any faith or respect in them or anything that they say.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 30, 2021)

lklawson said:


> You don't have to be humble to be good at what you do, and that includes practicing and teaching martial arts.  With utterances such as "I am the greatest!" and "Float like a butterfly; sting like a bee," Muhammad Ali wasn't particularly humble. The man had his own cartoon for cry'n out loud.  But he was freaking *good*.
> 
> But being humble usually makes it nicer for the students.
> 
> ...


I’d go so far as to say he was a master boxer.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 30, 2021)

ThatOneSyrian said:


> I'm gonna add to this discussion and say that anyone can call themselves a professional, and anyone who actually is a professional at something isn't necessarily a competent human being. Someone calling themselves a Grandmaster is not just a completely subjective thing but even if for whatever reason they have achieved Yoda levels of competency in their art, they are still prone to mistakes. Look at John C. Kim, a skilled, widely-heralded martial artist who ended up being a fraud. If you wanna go beyond martial arts, look at Elizabeth Holmes, a highly-educated individual who ended up being probably the most incompetent, dim-witted psychological manipulator in human history. Despite pretending to be a high authority in her field of study, she barely got anywhere before being called out for her rubbish.
> 
> This is why I don't like the title "Grandmaster"; it's a pompous, narcissistic way that an ordinary person will use to try to assert themselves above others. The only way that I will respect a highly-proficient individual is if they are humble, doing away with these ridiculous titles, and instead show competency through their actions. The moment someone tries to pull a Snoke on me and refer to themselves as Supreme Grandmaster Ruler Overlord Commander-in-Chief Admiral General Deluxe is the moment I refuse to put any faith or respect in them or anything that they say.


A lot of overstated points in that.


----------



## ThatOneCanadian (Oct 30, 2021)

gpseymour said:


> A lot of overstated points in that.


Consider it a passionate rant.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Oct 30, 2021)

Note:  There is a very relevant question for you TDK historians towards the end.

I don't have any problem with the titles, "Master/Grand Master" per say.  I do have a problem with how many came to get those titles, or their 8th and 9th degrees.

Prior to WWll, there were few, if any, Okinawan pretenders to the throne.  Two reasons for this.  One, high ranks were given out by committee composed of the mutually acknowledged current masters, spanning different styles, so there was no favoritism.  Most of these guys knew each other, and their skill, well, or had trained under the same instructors.  Ranks were not for sale.  These guys were hard core in their training and would not give high rank or title to some mediocre wanna-be.

Two, if anyone tried to promote himself or pass himself off as a "Master," he would have been called out by one of the real deals and had his butt kicked. Most of the Masters of this time were bad a**, no doubt about it.  Serious challenge matches were not unheard of.

With the post WWll development of different styles, and a little later, different organizations within those styles, rank/title awards became de-centralized, each subgroup having their own authority, for the most part.  In Okinawa, and Japan as well I imagine, there was still some quasi government oversight and the ever present peer pressure.  Okinawa is not a big place and reputation meant a lot.

By the late 1960's, the USA had an explosion of masters and very high dans.  Too big a country and too many cowboys wanting to be top dog and "master" of their own little fiefdom.  Peer pressure disappeared.   Also, the great majority of senior American black belts had no idea of the vast amount of skills and knowledge that was held back from them.  Many really thought they were close to "master" level, when in reality, they were just advanced beginners, experts only in the basics.

The other factor was business and marketing.  In the highly commercialized period of American karate in the 1970's, such titles were a draw for prospective students.  I know that in TKD, Master title comes at 5th degree.  Most (all I know of) Okinawan and Japanese styles don't use that title until 8th degree (maybe 7th these days) , which Korean styles use for Grand Master.  That last title rarely exists in the Okin/Jap arts.  So there is some title variation.

Now, *I would like to know if TDK in Korea/USA had those Master degree benchmarks pre 1970*.  The reason I ask is, if there was a Korean 5th degree and an Okinawan 6th degree, the TDK guy could "legally" call himself a Master, while the Okinawan guy could not.  This would give the TDK school a competitive business advantage, an incentive to one style having a lower benchmark for a lofty title.

It was said that Korea made a concerted effort to "invade" the American market and spread their business model around that time.  I make no value judgement here.  I'm just wondering (exploring an hypothesis) if this idea is a possibility.


----------



## Urban Trekker (Oct 31, 2021)

isshinryuronin said:


> Now, *I would like to know if TDK in Korea/USA had those Master degree benchmarks pre 1970*.  The reason I ask is, if there was a Korean 5th degree and an Okinawan 6th degree, the TDK guy could "legally" call himself a Master, while the Okinawan guy could not.  This would give the TDK school a competitive business advantage, an incentive to one style having a lower benchmark for a lofty title.



I'm kind of confused as to how this would work.  First, I'm wondering how many people who are looking to begin their martial arts journeys are really thinking that far ahead.  Secondly, even if the head of a TKD dojang were to explain this to a prospective student, that prospective student would either be confused or overwhelmed.  After all, the only thing that perspective student knows is "black belt."



> It was said that Korea made a concerted effort to "invade" the American market and spread their business model around that time.  I make no value judgement here.  I'm just wondering (exploring an hypothesis) if this idea is a possibility.



I'm curious about this myself.  Might be different because of the area I live in (I'm told that Newport News is the city with the highest percentage of Koreans in the US), I've noticed that all the TKD dojangs are owned by Mr. Kim, not Mr. Jones.  Conversely, all the karate dojos are by Mr. Jones, not Mr. Yamamoto.  So it looks like there's something to what you're saying.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 31, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> I'm kind of confused as to how this would work. First, I'm wondering how many people who are looking to begin their martial arts journeys are really thinking that far ahead. Secondly, even if the head of a TKD dojang were to explain this to a prospective student, that prospective student would either be confused or overwhelmed. After all, the only thing that perspective student knows is "black belt."


I think his thought was that being able to refer to oneself as a "Master" (without angering the higher-ups in your own style) had more marketing cachet than not having that title, rather than students being drawn to the idea of getting their own title sooner. And it might be true, given most folks have very little knowledge with which to make a decision in choosing a school.


----------



## MadMartigan (Oct 31, 2021)

isshinryuronin said:


> Now, *I would like to know if TDK in Korea/USA had those Master degree benchmarks pre 1970*. The reason I ask is, if there was a Korean 5th degree and an Okinawan 6th degree, the TDK guy could "legally" call himself a Master, while the Okinawan guy could not. This would give the TDK school a competitive business advantage, an incentive to one style having a lower benchmark for a lofty title.


I'm by no means a history expert in all areas of this subject. What I do know is this.
On the ITF style of the TKD house, the term Master was reserved for 7th Dan + since (at least 1972). Grand Master was reserved fot 9th Dan only (there being no 10th). To my knowledge, that is still the case within North America and internationally. 

I believe Tang Soo Do (and KKW TKD) uses master at 4th Dan, GM at 7th +. Someone more well educated than I would have to answer when that became the normal process for those styles.

I too see the marketing appeal and why people (at least those whose egos lead their way) wanted to have the highest rank in their market. As a teen, I recall looking through Yellow Pages ads for martial arts schools. As someone with no knowledge of what to look for, seeing 'Great Grand Master Imperial Moff Tarkin who had a 27th Degree Black Belt with 30 confirmed kills' sounded quite impressive.


----------



## Urban Trekker (Nov 1, 2021)

MadMartigan said:


> I too see the marketing appeal and why people (at least those whose egos lead their way) wanted to have the highest rank in their market. As a teen, I recall looking through Yellow Pages ads for martial arts schools. *As someone with no knowledge of what to look for, seeing 'Great Grand Master Imperial Moff Tarkin who had a 27th Degree Black Belt with 30 confirmed kills' sounded quite impressive.*


I can only speak for myself, but even back to my teens, I'd have found such a title to be highly cringeworthy.  At the end of the day, as a new student, _I'm_ the one paying _him_. In other words, I hired him to perform a service.  I'll be damned if I call anyone, least of all someone whose table I'm putting food on, "master."


----------



## Steve (Nov 1, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> I can only speak for myself, but even back to my teens, I'd have found such a title to be highly cringeworthy.  At the end of the day, as a new student, _I'm_ the one paying _him_. In other words, I hired him to perform a service.  I'll be damned if I call anyone, least of all someone whose table I'm putting food on, "master."


I think this is a great point.  The martial arts instructor is being paid for a service, in much the same way that a personal trainer is paid.  It's a relationship that is expected to deliver tangible results.


----------



## lklawson (Nov 1, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> I can only speak for myself, but even back to my teens, I'd have found such a title to be highly cringeworthy.  At the end of the day, as a new student, _I'm_ the one paying _him_. In other words, I hired him to perform a service.  I'll be damned if I call anyone, least of all someone whose table I'm putting food on, "master."


That's just because you have a hangup about what "master" means.  At some point my may have to stop carrying around some of that social baggage.


----------



## lklawson (Nov 1, 2021)

Steve said:


> I think this is a great point.  The martial arts instructor is being paid for a service, in much the same way that a personal trainer is paid.  It's a relationship that is expected to deliver tangible results.


Much as an Apprenticeship would?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Steve (Nov 1, 2021)

lklawson said:


> Much as an Apprenticeship would?
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


In an apprenticeship, you're paying me.  An electrician's apprentice is being paid to learn a trade, for example.  I think it would be really interesting if a martial arts instructor actually brought on a student or students, and paid them to learn the style, so that they could go out and function independently.

But that said, I think if I hire a personal trainer, or pay for jazzercise... that's more analogous than learning a trade.

Edit:  I am still chuckling at the visual of someone hiring a personal trainer who is running them through a circuit.  "Kirk, 1 minute left!  Don't stop... keep going!"  "Yes, Master!"  "5 more burpees, Kirk.  I know it hurts!"  "Yes, Master!"  Adds a whole new dynamic to that relationship.


----------



## Steve (Nov 1, 2021)

Steve said:


> In an apprenticeship, you're paying me.  An electrician's apprentice is being paid to learn a trade, for example.  I think it would be really interesting if a martial arts instructor actually brought on a student or students, and paid them to learn the style, so that they could go out and function independently.
> 
> But that said, I think if I hire a personal trainer, or pay for jazzercise... that's more analogous than learning a trade.
> 
> Edit:  I am still chuckling at the visual of someone hiring a personal trainer who is running them through a circuit.  "Kirk, 1 minute left!  Don't stop... keep going!"  "Yes, Master!"  "5 more burpees, Kirk.  I know it hurts!"  "Yes, Master!"  Adds a whole new dynamic to that relationship.


You know, thinking about this, I wonder if it's viable...  if I hire you as an apprentice, take over responsibility for your training and pay you a fair wage for your time, I could then fire you.   I could also teach you the business elements and instructorship elements of the style.  In other words, as you learn the style, you would be required to take on more responsibility.  I would be getting value from you, and the relationship wouldn't be me providing a service to you; rather, it would be you are my employee.  I don't know if it would work or not, but it's an interesting thought.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Nov 1, 2021)

Steve said:


> I think this is a great point.  The martial arts instructor is being paid for a service, in much the same way that a personal trainer is paid.  It's a relationship that is expected to deliver tangible results.


It takes a few months to become a personal trainer.  A martial art master may have studied  30-40 years to earn his title.  There may be a monetary business consideration with mutual obligation, true, but the traditional master-student relationship can go much deeper.


Urban Trekker said:


> _I'm_ the one paying _him_. In other words, I hired him to perform a service. I'll be damned if I call anyone, least of all someone whose table I'm putting food on, "master."


Do you have a problem calling someone you hired to replace your shoulder joint, "Doctor"?  As Iklawson led up to, the "master" in the MA context is a title of earned respect, referring to a level of skill and knowledge, perhaps even wisdom, NOT someone who "owns" you or tries to control your life.


----------



## lklawson (Nov 1, 2021)

Steve said:


> In an apprenticeship, you're paying me.  An electrician's apprentice is being paid to learn a trade, for example.  I think it would be really interesting if a martial arts instructor actually brought on a student or students, and paid them to learn the style, so that they could go out and function independently.
> 
> But that said, I think if I hire a personal trainer, or pay for jazzercise... that's more analogous than learning a trade.
> 
> Edit:  I am still chuckling at the visual of someone hiring a personal trainer who is running them through a circuit.  "Kirk, 1 minute left!  Don't stop... keep going!"  "Yes, Master!"  "5 more burpees, Kirk.  I know it hurts!"  "Yes, Master!"  Adds a whole new dynamic to that relationship.


Personally, I don't get "paid" per se for teaching.  I teach Judo at the Y (last session) and I don't get paid for that, though my membership is comped.  The students pay the Y but I don't get any money for it.  When I end up going to the New Carlisle club, it's a "no mat fees" club and I won't get paid there either.  When I teach Western arts, I don't ask for any money outside of club "dues" to help buy equipment.

I've done a few seminars that paid me a small percentage of the take but, honestly, that's pretty rare (and pretty small money too).

I've paid for martial arts instruction and I've gotten it for free too.  I've never been too worried about whether or not I make money from it.  Someone wants to learn from me, most of the time, I'm happy to teach.  In JMA I've never asked to be called anything other than Sensei and even that feels a little odd but, out of respect for the art, I try to maintain that tradition.  In WMA, I've never been asked to be called much of anything at all.  "Instructor," "Teacher," "Study Leader" or something similar.  I don't have a Coaching Certificate or I might have considered that.  I certainly don't have a Maestro's certificate and I won't claim anything close to it, both out of honesty and out of respect for my friends in Fencing.

To a large degree, I find all this angst over whether or not to call someone "master" to be somewhat amusing, perplexing, and, frankly, over-thinking.  If the person knows shiz that you really want to learn, then call 'em whatever the heck he wants you to or you don't get to learn it from them.

If I call someone "master," I already know what my social and moral limits are on that term.  Same with bowing or any of the various salutes.  I can acknowledge skill and honor them without thinking that by doing so they have some sort of lien on running my life.  And if they think they do, they're in for a rude surprise (and I can tell you this as a fact from direct personal experience).

In the end, what does "master" mean?  Pretty much anything that a given group/club/authorizing&certifying-body decides.  You know, same as "black belt."  What's it mean to me?  Pretty much nothing. ...or rather, whatever I feel like it should mean in the given context.  And I'll call them their titles *in a given context*. So when I took seminar classes from Maestro Ramon Martinez and Maestro Jeannette Acosta-Martinez, while in class, I referred to them as "Maestro."  After class when were were sitting around, swapping stories, drinking, and eating chocolate, I called him "Ramon" and her "Jeannette."  And they called me "Kirk."

I'm really struggling to figure out why it's a big deal to most people.

That said, I do enjoy the debate.  Keeps the mind sharp.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Nov 1, 2021)

Steve said:


> You know, thinking about this, I wonder if it's viable...  if I hire you as an apprentice, take over responsibility for your training and pay you a fair wage for your time, I could then fire you.   I could also teach you the business elements and instructorship elements of the style.  In other words, as you learn the style, you would be required to take on more responsibility.  I would be getting value from you, and the relationship wouldn't be me providing a service to you; rather, it would be you are my employee.  I don't know if it would work or not, but it's an interesting thought.


In old-style apprenticeships, your father would leave you with me.  You'd live with me and I'd give you food, lodging, and train you in whatever skill it was that I was a Master of.  You wouldn't get paid anything if I didn't feel like it.  I'm teaching you a professional skill; that's your pay.  You'd do whatever I told you until you got to the point of being a Journeyman when I'd sort of release you into the wild.  You'd still be under my direction but you'd be mostly independent.  Eventually, you'd submit a Master Work and be graded for mastery in the art.  Some people believe that's what the Staircase of Loretto was.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Steve (Nov 1, 2021)

isshinryuronin said:


> It takes a few months to become a personal trainer.  A martial art master may have studied  30-40 years to earn his title.  There may be a monetary business consideration with mutual obligation, true, but the traditional master-student relationship can go much deeper.


I have a handy man I've worked with for 15 years now.  I consider him to be more than a hired hand at this point.  But I wouldn't call him master. 



isshinryuronin said:


> Do you have a problem calling someone you hired to replace your shoulder joint, "Doctor"?  As Iklawson led up to, the "master" in the MA context is a title of earned respect, referring to a level of skill and knowledge, perhaps even wisdom, NOT someone who "owns" you or tries to control your life.


There is a very clear and obvious difference between someone who has earned an honorific through earning an accredited degree and any martial arts instructor.  For that matter, there is a clear and obvious difference between a "master electrician" or "master carpenter" and a martial artist.  Very different.


----------



## Steve (Nov 1, 2021)

lklawson said:


> In old-style apprenticeships, your father would leave you with me.  You'd live with me and I'd give you food, lodging, and train you in whatever skill it was that I was a Master of.  You wouldn't get paid anything if I didn't feel like it.  I'm teaching you a professional skill; that's your pay.  You'd do whatever I told you until you got to the point of being a Journeyman when I'd sort of release you into the wild.  You'd still be under my direction but you'd be mostly independent.  Eventually, you'd submit a Master Work and be graded for mastery in the art.  Some people believe that's what the Staircase of Loretto was.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


yeah, and I've heard about some situations akin to that even today... though I think they are rare and I've only ever heard about them in Japanese traditional arts like Aikido.  I've never heard of any MA relationship like that in the USA, though.

One could say that Sumo is like that even now, where the upper level guys who get paid basically fund the training for the lower level guys who do not get paid.


----------



## Steve (Nov 1, 2021)

lklawson said:


> Personally, I don't get "paid" per se for teaching.  I teach Judo at the Y (last session) and I don't get paid for that, though my membership is comped.  The students pay the Y but I don't get any money for it.  When I end up going to the New Carlisle club, it's a "no mat fees" club and I won't get paid there either.  When I teach Western arts, I don't ask for any money outside of club "dues" to help buy equipment.
> 
> I've done a few seminars that paid me a small percentage of the take but, honestly, that's pretty rare (and pretty small money too).
> 
> ...


To be clear, I'm not hung up on it at all.  It's a title like any other.  The relational dynamic that it hints at, though, is very dysfunctional to me, and leads to all kinds of misunderstandings.  Things like switching schools becomes a big deal.  If I want to switch from LA Fitness to Planet Fitness, there is nothing to it.  No hard feelings on anyone's part.  But shoot, try switching from one MA school to another... particularly within the same MA style, and now we can see the issues with the mindset that underlies this "master" business.


----------



## lklawson (Nov 1, 2021)

Steve said:


> There is a very clear and obvious difference between someone who has earned an honorific through earning an accredited degree and any martial arts instructor.  For that matter, there is a clear and obvious difference between a "master electrician" or "master carpenter" and a martial artist.  Very different.


I will point out again that in Fencing the title "Maestro" is particularly common.  I know several who are quite proud of earning the title; it required a great deal of dedication, hard work, and years of their lives.  Or are you feeling like arguing that Fencing isn't a martial art?  

I've also heard the term used to refer to orchestral directors but I don't know if that is common, certified, or some sort of honorific pleasantry.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Steve (Nov 1, 2021)

lklawson said:


> I will point out again that in Fencing the title "Maestro" is particularly common.  I know several who are quite proud of earning the title; it required a great deal of dedication, hard work, and years of their lives.  Or are you feeling like arguing that Fencing isn't a martial art?
> 
> I've also heard the term used to refer to orchestral directors but I don't know if that is common, certified, or some sort of honorific pleasantry.
> 
> ...


Meastro is French.  That's very different.

Seriously, though, as I just said, it's not the word itself, but the dysfunctional relationship it might hint at.  If you're at a school, paying for lessons, and are concerned about switching to another school, or even just quitting the school, and it's weird... that's a red flag.  Whether you call the instructor coach, sensei, master, or whatever, that's a bad dynamic.  And, it seems that where this dynamic tends to exist are in schools that emphasize these types of un-accredited honorifics.

Also, doctors, lawyers, Certified Forensic Accountants, ABO certified opticians, and so on... those are honorifics that reflect some very specific credentials that are regulated and accredited.   They just simply aren't the same thing... at all... as calling John Smith the dojo owner, "Master Smith."  

One of the good things about international competition is that there are generally associated national and international governing bodies.   Olympic sports including fencing, judo, TKD, and wrestling, have well structured credentialing, and a lot of international calibration.  Point being that "martial arts" is a diverse situation.  You're trying to paint with a broad brush by avoiding the issue at hand by pointing out that it isn't universal.  As I said earlier, I'm not personally hung up on the terms themselves, but am more interested in the nature of the relationship it connotes.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 1, 2021)

Steve said:


> You know, thinking about this, I wonder if it's viable...  if I hire you as an apprentice, take over responsibility for your training and pay you a fair wage for your time, I could then fire you.   I could also teach you the business elements and instructorship elements of the style.  In other words, as you learn the style, you would be required to take on more responsibility.  I would be getting value from you, and the relationship wouldn't be me providing a service to you; rather, it would be you are my employee.  I don't know if it would work or not, but it's an interesting thought.


It might work, where a student comes in expecting to make a career of teaching. Of course, there would have to be some reasonable expectation of success in that.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 1, 2021)

Steve said:


> To be clear, I'm not hung up on it at all.  It's a title like any other.  The relational dynamic that it hints at, though, is very dysfunctional to me, and leads to all kinds of misunderstandings.  Things like switching schools becomes a big deal.  If I want to switch from LA Fitness to Planet Fitness, there is nothing to it.  No hard feelings on anyone's part.  But shoot, try switching from one MA school to another... particularly within the same MA style, and now we can see the issues with the mindset that underlies this "master" business.


I think a fitness gym is less personal (at the staff level) than most people’s MA training location becomes after a year or so. Maybe it’s more like changing doctors - the change implies something about the relationship and/or interaction of the doctor (or staff) and patient.


----------



## Steve (Nov 1, 2021)

gpseymour said:


> It might work, where a student comes in expecting to make a career of teaching. Of course, there would have to be some reasonable expectation of success in that.


I think that already exists.  Take @skribs' situation, for example.  But  how would the dynamic change if his instructor paid @skribs to learn the material and teach the classes, etc?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 1, 2021)

Steve said:


> Meastro is French.


Italian, I think, but your point remains unchanged. In any case, it does still mean “master”.


----------



## Steve (Nov 1, 2021)

gpseymour said:


> I think a fitness gym is less personal (at the staff level) than most people’s MA training location becomes after a year or so. Maybe it’s more like changing doctors - the change implies something about the relationship and/or interaction of the doctor (or staff) and patient.


Depends on the situation.  Here's another question to ponder.  If a martial arts relationship is is more personal than a similar situation with a personal training... should it be?  Is that necessarily a good thing?  Or is that 'personal' relationship one has with their Master an easy way for the school owner to exert inappropriate emotional pressure on a person who simply wants to leave the school for their own reasons?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 1, 2021)

Steve said:


> I think that already exists.  Take @skribs' situation, for example.  But  how would the dynamic change if his instructor paid @skribs to learn the material and teach the classes, etc?


Another thought occurred to me. The instructor would need to be able to leverage his student from the beginning. An apprentice plumber is actually doing work (and often the dirtiest work). What work would a new MA student do yo earn pay?


----------



## Steve (Nov 1, 2021)

gpseymour said:


> Italian, I think, but your point remains unchanged. In any case, it does still mean “master”.


  It was a JOKE!


----------



## Steve (Nov 1, 2021)

gpseymour said:


> Another thought occurred to me. The instructor would need to be able to leverage his student from the beginning. An apprentice plumber is actually doing work (and often the dirtiest work). What work would a new MA student do yo earn pay?


Well, I mean... all the work around the school.  Cleaning the mats... going on various errands.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 1, 2021)

Steve said:


> Depends on the situation.  Here's another question to ponder.  If a martial arts relationship is is more personal than a similar situation with a personal training... should it be?  Is that necessarily a good thing?  Or is that 'personal' relationship one has with their Master an easy way for the school owner to exert inappropriate emotional pressure on a person who simply wants to leave the school for their own reasons?


I think it's inherently more personal in most cases, because there's a primary instructor for the student. Think of how much more personal the relationship is with a personal trainer someone works with for a year or more, as opposed to their relationship with the general staff.

I agree with what I think you're getting at here - some of the relationships (or at least the relationship dynamics) in MA are...odd.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 1, 2021)

Steve said:


> It was a JOKE!


In that case, r/whoosh.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 1, 2021)

Steve said:


> Well, I mean... all the work around the school.  Cleaning the mats... going on various errands.


Yep, if the student is doing all that, that could be about the same as an apprentice in a trade. Of course, at some point, helping run classes could come into play.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Nov 1, 2021)

Do


Steve said:


> You know, thinking about this, I wonder if it's viable...  if I hire you as an apprentice, take over responsibility for your training and pay you a fair wage for your time, I could then fire you.   I could also teach you the business elements and instructorship elements of the style.  In other words, as you learn the style, you would be required to take on more responsibility.  I would be getting value from you, and the relationship wouldn't be me providing a service to you; rather, it would be you are my employee.  I don't know if it would work or not, but it's an interesting thought.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Nov 1, 2021)

gpseymour said:


> Yep, if the student is doing all that, that could be about the same as an apprentice in a trade. Of course, at some point, helping run classes could come into play.


Damnit! I was an apprentice and didn’t even know it!?


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Nov 1, 2021)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> Do
> 
> 
> Steve said:
> ...


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Nov 1, 2021)

Never even got a box to sleep in at the foot of master’s bed…


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Nov 1, 2021)

Worst part is, he was Italian.


----------



## MadMartigan (Nov 1, 2021)

So for those who see a difference between the honorifics for doctor or master; what do you think about the tradition in BJJ of referring to instructors as Professor?
Are all 3 perhaps just a different way of saying a similar thing?
If I run into my doctor on the street, I don't say hey 'Phil'. He'd be Doctor 'Smith'. Seems like the Professor honorific is used the same way... so what is so different about the word master? (besides, as Steve said, the over prevalence of abusive relationships that have occurred).
If all 3 are meant to convey an increadibly high level of skill/education in a given field of expertise, are they not more similar than different?
Is the difference mostly just the baggage that comes with the English usage of the word master?


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Nov 1, 2021)

MadMartigan said:


> So for those who see a difference between the honorifics for doctor or master; what do you think about the tradition in BJJ of referring to instructors as Professor?
> Are all 3 perhaps just a different way of saying a similar thing?
> If I run into my doctor on the street, I don't say hey 'Phil'. He'd be Doctor 'Smith'. Seems like the Professor honorific is used the same way... so what is so different about the word master? (besides, as Steve said, the over prevalence of abusive relationships that have occurred).
> If all 3 are meant to convey an increadibly high level of skill/education in a given field of expertise, are they not more similar than different?
> Is the difference mostly just the baggage that comes with the English usage of the word master?


In the case of BJJ, "professor" comes from the Portuguese spoken in Brazil, where it just means "teacher".  Personally I prefer not to use the title, because it has a different set of implications in English. I think I've had 3 people call me "professor" - two were Brazilian and the 3rd had spent a lot of time training with a Brazilian. I'm much more comfortable with just "coach", which is the general usage in our gym.


----------



## Steve (Nov 1, 2021)

MadMartigan said:


> So for those who see a difference between the honorifics for doctor or master; what do you think about the tradition in BJJ of referring to instructors as Professor?
> Are all 3 perhaps just a different way of saying a similar thing?
> If I run into my doctor on the street, I don't say hey 'Phil'. He'd be Doctor 'Smith'. Seems like the Professor honorific is used the same way... so what is so different about the word master? (besides, as Steve said, the over prevalence of abusive relationships that have occurred).
> If all 3 are meant to convey an increadibly high level of skill/education in a given field of expertise, are they not more similar than different?
> Is the difference mostly just the baggage that comes with the English usage of the word master?


Professor is like sensei , which is to say it’s teacher in the home language of the art.  It’s a little misleading because it isn’t intended to be professor in the sense we use it in English.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Nov 2, 2021)

To reach that upper level,
your mind, body and soul must be one. 

It's a sacrifice, it takes hard work,
It's a way of life. 

When you got the glow, you feel the one
When you got the glow, Your body's gold

So don't let go, of the power of elevation.


----------



## dvcochran (Nov 2, 2021)

lklawson said:


> That's just because you have a hangup about what "master" means.  At some point my may have to stop carrying around some of that social baggage.


I would add that I do not feel @Urban Trekker or @Steve have trained under someone truly worthy of the title. 
And no, I am not putting the title in some mystical realm. 

But the local guy down at the gym teaching MMA/BJJ (or 'insert style'), an assistant instructor or even Most new school owner/instructors, or anyone with just a few years experience (no matter how much training time they crammed in) are qualified to hold the title. 

The key word that comes to mind for me is holistic: "characterized by comprehension of the parts of something as intimately interconnected and explicable only by reference to the whole." The 'whole', while subjective to many is completely missed by most. 

Yes, waxing philosophic but accurate overall.


----------



## Urban Trekker (Nov 2, 2021)

dvcochran said:


> I would add that I do not feel @Urban Trekker or @Steve have trained under someone truly worthy of the title.
> And no, I am not putting the title in some mystical realm.


Without doxing myself, anyone who doesn't mind using the term would beg to differ.

The fact of the matter is, I simply refuse to use the term.  And it goes both ways: if anyone tried to call me "master," I'd nip that in the bud before they could even finish the word.


dvcochran said:


> But the local guy down at the gym teaching MMA/BJJ (or 'insert style'), an assistant instructor or even Most new school owner/instructors, or anyone with just a few years experience (no matter how much training time they crammed in) are qualified to hold the title.
> 
> The key word that comes to mind for me is holistic: "characterized by comprehension of the parts of something as intimately interconnected and explicable only by reference to the whole." The 'whole', while subjective to many is completely missed by most.
> 
> Yes, waxing philosophic but accurate overall.


Speaking of key words, if you look up "master" in the dictionary, at least half the definitions reference ownership or domination over a person or animal.


----------



## lklawson (Nov 2, 2021)

MadMartigan said:


> So for those who see a difference between the honorifics for doctor or master; what do you think about the tradition in BJJ of referring to instructors as Professor?
> Are all 3 perhaps just a different way of saying a similar thing?
> If I run into my doctor on the street, I don't say hey 'Phil'. He'd be Doctor 'Smith'. Seems like the Professor honorific is used the same way... so what is so different about the word master? (besides, as Steve said, the over prevalence of abusive relationships that have occurred).
> If all 3 are meant to convey an increadibly high level of skill/education in a given field of expertise, are they not more similar than different?
> Is the difference mostly just the baggage that comes with the English usage of the word master?


I have a number of friends who are MD's.  I almost never address them as "Doctor."  I also have a number of friends, associates, and "internal customers," who have Doctorates in the sciences.  Frequently they are addressed as "Doctor" in email and such.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Urban Trekker (Nov 2, 2021)

lklawson said:


> I have a number of friends who are MD's.  I almost never address them as "Doctor."  I also have a number of friends, associates, and "internal customers," who have Doctorates in the sciences.  Frequently they are addressed as "Doctor" in email and such.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


A PhD, EdD, or any other research doctorate is considered to be higher than an MD.  And an MD is considered to be on the same level as a JD.  There's a reason I read, and I can't remember, why an MD is addressed as "doctor" and a JD is not.

Personally, I never used the term "doctor" by itself, when referencing another person.  I will say "Doctor So-and-so," but never simply "doctor."  That said, I refer to someone with an MD as a physician.

I typically don't even like saying "Doctor So-and-so" in reference to physicians (though I have no problem do it for someone who holds a research-based doctorate), but I will do it in a hospital or any other medical setting for ease of communication with the staff there.

This isn't for reasons related to me avoiding the use of the term "master," this is more my belief that the holders of professional degrees (MD, JD, DDS, OD, etc) and holders of research-based doctorates need to be distinguished from each other.

If I was on a plane that crashed, and a surviving flight attendant or pilot asked "Is there a doctor here" - and I had a PhD in history - I'd be that a-hole who'd waste everyone's time by raising his hand and later clarifying once asked to tend to the mortally wounded victims.


----------



## caped crusader (Nov 2, 2021)

I think myself that a real "Grandmaster", regardless of country or martial art does not need the Title as everyone has respect for them.


----------



## dvcochran (Nov 2, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> Without doxing myself, anyone who doesn't mind using the term would beg to differ.
> 
> The fact of the matter is, I simply refuse to use the term.  And it goes both ways: if anyone tried to call me "master," I'd nip that in the bud before they could even finish the word.
> 
> Speaking of key words, if you look up "master" in the dictionary, at least half the definitions reference ownership or domination over a person or animal.


All I can say is you are referencing the noun meaning only.

Master:

_adjective_
characterized by comprehension of the parts of something as intimately interconnected and explicable only by reference to the whole.


Urban Trekker said:


> are doxing myself, anyone who doesn't mind using the term would beg to differ.
> 
> The fact of the matter is, I simply refuse to use the term.  And it goes both ways: if anyone tried to call me "master," I'd nip that in the bud before they could even finish the word.
> 
> Speaking of key words, if you look up "master" in the dictionary, at least half the definitions reference ownership or domination over a person or animal.


All I can say is you are looking at it only from the noun definition.

Master - 

_adjective_
having or showing very great skill or proficiency.
main; principal.

_verb_
acquire complete knowledge or skill in (an accomplishment, technique, or art).
gain control of; overcome.

I live in the deep south and believe me when I say the 'Master' ideology you are referring to is outdated and nonexistent to everyone other than the media and radicals.


----------



## caped crusader (Nov 2, 2021)

dvcochran said:


> I live in the deep south


I heard the Gals are hot there!


----------



## Urban Trekker (Nov 2, 2021)

caped crusader said:


> I heard the Gals are hot there!


I hear there's an obsession with that in the UK, but our Deep South is basically your West Country.  As a matter of fact... the West Country is actually the ancestral homeland of the majority of American Deep Southerners.


----------



## caped crusader (Nov 2, 2021)

Urban Trekker said:


> I hear there's an obsession with that in the UK, but our Deep South is basically your West Country.  As a matter of fact... the West Country is actually the ancestral homeland of the majority of American Deep Southerners.


I don´t know but they sure looked Hot in the Dukes of Hazzard ...


----------



## Steve (Nov 2, 2021)

dvcochran said:


> I would add that I do not feel @Urban Trekker or @Steve have trained under someone truly worthy of the title.


Yeah, I think that's true.  The logic is screwy, but it's not wrong.  I have never referred to a coach/instructor as "master"; therefore, I've never trained under someone I've considered "truly worthy of the title."  

It's a circular point, though.  Because I think the term "master" is often problematic in the context of martial arts, it goes without saying that I am not comfortable using the "title".  I've trained under some elite BJJ practitioners, though. 



dvcochran said:


> And no, I am not putting the title in some mystical realm.



Err.....


dvcochran said:


> But the local guy down at the gym teaching MMA/BJJ (or 'insert style'), an assistant instructor or even Most new school owner/instructors, or anyone with just a few years experience (no matter how much training time they crammed in) are qualified to hold the title.
> 
> The key word that comes to mind for me is holistic: "characterized by comprehension of the parts of something as intimately interconnected and explicable only by reference to the whole." The 'whole', while subjective to many is completely missed by most.
> 
> Yes, waxing philosophic but accurate overall.


Logic is an essential foundation to philosophy.  I actually think if you took some time to learn formal logic, you'd dig it.  Would appeal to your engineer's brain, I bet.  And it would help you examine your own thoughts and arguments a little more critically... keep you from jumping to so many self referential or reductive conclusions.


----------



## Steve (Nov 2, 2021)

caped crusader said:


> I heard the Gals are hot there!


LOL.  The hair is bigger, if you're into that.


----------



## caped crusader (Nov 2, 2021)

Steve said:


> LOL.  The hair is bigger, if you're into that.


on the head yeah...


----------



## cane56 (Nov 3, 2021)

Jusroc said:


> Hello. Thanks for replying to my post, and just to clarify, I, no way claim to be a Grand Master, or even a master. I was just asking a question that I thought was interesting.
> 
> I am what I am, an individual with experience in various areas of the martial arts. Some experiences I have had have been good (and painful at the same time), and other experiences have lead me to my own opinions and conclusions, which i will keep to myself.
> 
> ...


A lot of good Martial Artist came out of the Y. Great example Jim Harrison (Ronin). He started Judo in the YMCA and became a brown belt until his instructor went elsewhere. He taught the class as a brown belt until a man walked in and asked if he taught Karate. Mr. Harrison at the time didn't know what the man was saying. They had heard of a striking art, that Mr. Harrison thought was pronounced kaaa raut. He trained as a student of Karate while teaching this man Judo. He traveled the Midwest finding any and all that could teach him anything. Most of the early practitioners we're military people that were stationed in Korea or elsewhere in the east. He even created his own style at a tournament where they asked him style, he put down bushidokan. After the tournament it was now a style. Even trained under Bob Kurth a so called navy commando with only a knife! I'm not here to knock a style or a man. Sensei Harrison won many American titles in Judo as well as blood and guts full contact tournaments. Even into his 60s he won tournaments in the masters division. But because most of our teaching came from service men teaching in small school's in the 50s and 60s, who gives the title of Master? In all belt divisions, is a bell curve. Some skate by, some dedicate thier lives. Who do you want to learn from?


----------

