# Rank requirements?



## Stan (Nov 29, 2006)

How common is it to have formal rank requirements for the higher belts?  Does a person go from fifth degree to sixth degree because he has learned a new set of techniques that he did not know before?  I don't know, but I would think that by that time, a person should have the whole art, and rank should be based on quality of execution and performance, rather than an ever-increasing catalog of techniques.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Nov 29, 2006)

I believe that after 3rd, most organizations promote based on time in, time active, or other contributions (like setting records on how many events you can put on successfully a year, or getting the GM's coffee 'just right' (thats a joke))

Very few fast 3rd test for the ranks, the only modern arnis player I'm aware of who has tested past 3rd was Tim Hartman, who tested for his 6th in 2000. 

There are also a number of people who have skipped ranks (3rd to 5th, 5th to GM, etc) either in established orgs, or by splitting off and starting their own orgs.    In truth, the whole arnis rank thing is a matter of heated debate in some circles. Me personally, I like the idea of an organized curriculum, with set benchmark points, all the way up, with no 'time in' grading.  After all, they don't promote you in school unless you can demonstrate that you know the material.


----------



## Stan (Nov 29, 2006)

I agree there should be no "time in" promotions.  Further, extraordinary teaching ability, non-technical contribution to the art, etc, shouldn't merit rank.  Rank should be awarded for physical and spiritual development, not as a reward for service.

Since Professor's passing, though, who would do the testing for advanced ranks?  There's no one in the art who almost everyone recognizes as undisputably higher than everyone else.  What person or body right now could award fifth degree or above without every other group screaming bloody murder?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Nov 29, 2006)

Good question, one that has several heated opinions as well.

Some have sought out higher ranked MA players in the PI and gone to them for promotion. Some have promoted themselves.  Some have gone to variously structured peer-boards for promotion, both inside and outside of established organizations. Some have simply promoted themselves.

At the time of Remy's death, there were a handful of high ranks in the PI, a couple of Punong Guro's and Senior Masters, and the 6 Datus, the majority of these last 3 groups being in the 5th-6th degree range.  According to several accounts (including archived news from the old IMAF), the highest tested rank, at least in the US, was Hartmans back in 2000. One could make a reasonable assumption that the rest were time in or other types of promotions.  Theres a ton of players out there though. (Theres blanks in my memories so please forgive any errors/omissions)

3 of the Datus are active in the US, and 1 active in Europe
Tim Hartman, 6th under Remy, 9th under the WMAA.
Kelly Worden, 6th under Remy, 10th?? under WMAC
Shishir Inocalla, 6th under Remy, ?? now?
Dieter Knuttel (Germany), 6th under Remy, 7th now

There are the 2 IMAF's
Jeff Delany's (5th under Remy, 10th? now)
Randy Schea and the other MOTT's (all 5ths under Remy, not sure of current ranks)

As well as MARPIO, IMAFP, and numerous independents.

The politics side is a mess, as reading a number of older threads here will show. Short summary:
Tim Hartman announced his departure from the IMAF and formation of the WMAA in late November 2000. Remy's retirement was announced at this same time. In mid 2001, Remy died, and shortly thereafter the IMAF split into 2 factions. Several individuals also went independent or formed their own organizations during this time. Numerous others became more active/visible. Very shortly after Remys death, his children formed their own organization as well.  So, on the surface, it's a mess. But, not really.

Each organization has it's pluses and minuses. Try a few groups out, see who you 'gel' with, and enjoy the training. Check everyone out if you seek rank advancement, and go with who you feel most comfortable with. Most groups are pretty similar, though their focus and terminology may differ a bit depending on various things.




Note: My minds foggy, so I may have some things incorrect or in the wrong order. Corrections welcome.

Disclaimer: I'm a long time friend and student of Tim Hartman's, so some might see my opinion as somewhat biased.  So, get a few more


----------



## Rich Parsons (Dec 1, 2006)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Good question, one that has several heated opinions as well.
> 
> Some have sought out higher ranked MA players in the PI and gone to them for promotion. Some have promoted themselves. Some have gone to variously structured peer-boards for promotion, both inside and outside of established organizations. Some have simply promoted themselves.
> 
> ...




While talking to Datu Shishir, I asked him about a flyer I saw with 9th degree on it, and he said that was his local /family/town art, and only used the Datu title in reference to Modern Arnis. 

Datu Jornales is in the US, but is teaching his own system. 


Datu Hoffman is with the IMAF and 6 of the Master's of Tapi-Tapi. I beleive his rank was 5th under GM Remy Presas. (* I apologize if this is wrong. *) 

As to the MoTTs' in the same IMAF, I believe they are using the title as rank, and are leading their organization as they see to the best of their abilities.


----------

