# Grandmaster?



## JadeDragon (Jul 11, 2018)

What do you think qualifies someone to be a Grandmaster?


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 11, 2018)

Grand...as in grandfather.  A father who's offspring has also become a father.
Thus a master who's students have also become masters.
The hard part is to define master...good luck with that.


----------



## now disabled (Jul 11, 2018)

For one not calling himself/herself that


----------



## pdg (Jul 11, 2018)

now disabled said:


> For one not calling himself/herself that



If the title has been awarded by their organisation, then why is using it any different than using 'doctor'?


----------



## now disabled (Jul 11, 2018)

pdg said:


> If the title has been awarded by their organisation, then why is using it any different than using 'doctor'?



Ok point taken 

I meant more that few Grandmasters refer to themselves as such ...students may and organisations may but they themselves in my view do not


----------



## Reedone816 (Jul 11, 2018)

For fairly conduct, the title should not be assigned by oneself, but as acknowledgement from others.

As for the system i currently in, we assigned it to the person that most advanced/knowledged in our current system, so it simple, challenge him/her, if you can beat him/her regardless of age you can become the grandmaster.

Sent from my BV8000Pro using Tapatalk


----------



## now disabled (Jul 11, 2018)

Reedone816 said:


> For fairly conduct, the title should not be assigned by oneself, but as acknowledgement from others.
> 
> As for the system i currently in, we assigned it to the person that most advanced/knowledged in our current system, so it simple, challenge him/her, if you can beat him/her regardless of age you can become the grandmaster.
> 
> Sent from my BV8000Pro using Tapatalk



I wouldn't agree that beating a Grandmaster makes you a Grandmaster .


----------



## Reedone816 (Jul 11, 2018)

That is why i said it only in my system.
Of course beating it in accordance of the system.
For example in taichi, i might be wrong here, to gauge the understanding of the system is by sparring in push hand / tui sao, so in the system i currently in, if the student able to draw in tui sao against the master, than he is equal to the master.
But until now, that was never happened, so for the last two or three grandmaster generation, there was gap in knowledge, like the last one has over 20+ year knowledge gap with the late one, so for every generation, there was regression every time a grandmaster passed away.

Sent from my BV8000Pro using Tapatalk


----------



## now disabled (Jul 11, 2018)

Reedone816 said:


> That is why i said it only in my system.
> Of course beating it in accordance of the system.
> For example in taichi, i might be wrong here, to gauge the understanding of the system is by sparring in push hand / tui sao, so in the system i currently in, if the student able to draw in tui sao against the master, than he is equal to the master.
> But until now, that was never happened, so for the last two or three grandmaster generation, there was gap in knowledge, like the last one has over 20+ year knowledge gap with the late one, so for every generation, there was regression every time a grandmaster passed away.
> ...




Interesting you say regression ... maybe it just my reading of it but if that is the case then things are being lost or overlooked somewhere or they are not being passed on properly. ofcourse no two people can be compared however I would say imho that when any person is appointed as the head of a system/art/school of arts they should be preparing the successor well in advance as they themselves were as it imo highly unlikely that one day out of the blue they are named as such


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 11, 2018)

JadeDragon said:


> What do you think qualifies someone to be a Grandmaster?



Ego and arrogance.

There are no Grandmasters in China....only Shifu.


----------



## Reedone816 (Jul 11, 2018)

Unfortunately it is, the last one had been groomed in intensive training since the late one was appointed as the gm by his gm in the death bed.
The late gm also not yet on par with his last gm in understanding the system.
When this late gm passed away its been about tens of year intensive training, but still there was gap in understanding.
So it was suspect in something lost, but there are hope that through time every new generation gm will reach the near understanding level of the late one.
So its more in comprehension of the passed knowledge, not in the knowledge itself.


Sent from my BV8000Pro using Tapatalk


----------



## MI_martialist (Jul 11, 2018)

pdg said:


> If the title has been awarded by their organisation, then why is using it any different than using 'doctor'?



Because Doctor has standards that are universally recognized and is a DEGREE that one earns.  It is very different.


----------



## now disabled (Jul 11, 2018)

MI_martialist said:


> Because Doctor has standards that are universally recognized and is a DEGREE that one earns.  It is very different.



I get your point, however again I'd say not all degrees are universally recognized by any means


----------



## pdg (Jul 11, 2018)

MI_martialist said:


> Because Doctor has standards that are universally recognized and is a DEGREE that one earns.  It is very different.



A doctor of physics is called doctor, I wouldn't ask his advice on an ingrown toenail.

A doctor of medicine is called doctor, I wouldn't ask him about string theory.

Likewise, I wouldn't ask a chess grand master for advice on my side kick.

Neither term is universal and is only recognised within it's own context...

A group of people got together and decided upon the academic achievements required to confer the title 'doctor', it wasn't handed down by a higher power. Likewise, a group of people got together and decided upon the requirements to confer the title 'grand master'.


----------



## pdg (Jul 11, 2018)

MI_martialist said:


> Because Doctor has standards that are universally recognized and is a DEGREE that one earns.  It is very different.



Oh, also...

Do I take it you're suggesting that nobody _earns_ the grand master title?


----------



## _Simon_ (Jul 11, 2018)

Everyone shall now refer to me as Grandmaster, from now on.


I called dibs!


----------



## pdg (Jul 11, 2018)

_Simon_ said:


> Everyone shall now refer to me as Grandmaster, from now on.
> 
> 
> I called dibs!



Grand master of what?


----------



## _Simon_ (Jul 11, 2018)

pdg said:


> Grand master of what?


Nah just Grandmaster will do. Covers all bases.

XD


----------



## Headhunter (Jul 11, 2018)

I hate that term and refuse to use it. I don't see the point of it apart from ego flashing.


----------



## skribs (Jul 11, 2018)

In KKW Taekwondo a Grand Master rank can be achieved at 7th or 8th degree black belt (I believe).  Which means you must have been a black belt for a minimum of 21-28 years, probably more if you didn't test every time you were able to.  If you assume Master at 5th degree and GM at 8th degree, that means 10 years to become a Master, and another 18 years after that to be a GM.  As someone who is 30 years old and going for 3rd Dan next month, at a minimum I would be 55 years old before qualifying to be a grand master.  I'd be old enough to be a grandfather (although probably won't be) and I would have spent more than half my life doing Taekwondo.



now disabled said:


> For one not calling himself/herself that



I think it depends on the situation.  In Taekwondo, you wouldn't call yourself that unless you've earned the appropriate rank.  At which point I don't see the problem with demanding people call you by the title the organization has bestowed upon you.  I call my Master "Master" and I tell my students NOT to call me Master because I haven't earned it yet.  (I say "I'm mister, I'm not a master yet...although I like the sound of that!").  When I have earned the title, you bet I'm going to insist on my students calling me Master.

However, if someone has extensive compiled experience in martial arts and creates their own art or system, can they not name themselves Grandmaster of their new system?


----------



## pgsmith (Jul 11, 2018)

JadeDragon said:


> What do you think qualifies someone to be a Grandmaster?



Nothing.


----------



## Buka (Jul 11, 2018)

_Simon_ said:


> Everyone shall now refer to me as Grandmaster, from now on.
> 
> 
> I called dibs!



I've always loved a good dibs. Grandmaster Simon it is!


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 11, 2018)

I see the title grandmaster used in a lot of Americanized systems/organizations passing themselves off as “traditional Asian” systems/organizations where you’ve got these self-promoted and proclaimed Sokes and the like.  I’ve seen it used very times by actual Japanese and Okinawan organizations and/or those with strong lineage and/or cultural ties to them.  When I see it in those, it’s usually reserved for the head of and/or founder of an art/organization.  And it’s being said by someone else, ie an instructor under that person.  And it’s typically a non-Japanese saying it. I don’t think there’s an actual direct Japanese term for grandmaster.

For example, you may see someone saying Grandmaster Jigoro Kano, Grandmaster Gichin Funakoshi, Grandmaster Chojun Miyagi, etc.

I’m sure TKD people will discredit what I’m about to say, but by observation I typically see it mostly in TKD and it appears to me as a title tied to a very high rank like 8-10th dan.


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 11, 2018)

Then again whenever I see Grandmaster, I always think of this Grandmaster first.  The truest Grandmaster of them all...



 
GRANDMASTER FLASH!


----------



## pdg (Jul 11, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> I’m sure TKD people will discredit what I’m about to say, but by observation I typically see it mostly in TKD and it appears to me as a title tied to a very high rank like 8-10th dan.



Not to discredit 

In 'my' ITF, 7th and 8th dan are 'master' and 9th is 'gran master'. There is no 10th.

Other TKD orgs have different structures.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jul 11, 2018)

People in the USA and other parts of the West seem to like titles and accolades that elevate them above the rest.

I think in China at least, they don’t have the same attachment nor see much use for them.  Unless they are marketing to the USA or other parts of the West.


----------



## skribs (Jul 11, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> I’m sure TKD people will discredit what I’m about to say, but by observation I typically see it mostly in TKD and it appears to me as a title tied to a very high rank like 8-10th dan.



Maybe 7th Dan, but yes, it is entirely tied to rank.  Just like in the Army when someone is an O-7 you call them General or Admiral, in TKD if someone is D-7 or so you call them "Grand Master."



Flying Crane said:


> People in the USA and other parts of the West seem to like titles and accolades that elevate them above the rest.
> 
> I think in China at least, they don’t have the same attachment nor see much use for them. Unless they are marketing to the USA or other parts of the West.



I can't speak for China, but I think in Korean culture it is important, because it is important to my Master.  Of course, that may be him appropriating the American culture, so I can't be sure, but it seems like the title is important to him.  It's important to him because it's something he's earned, it's a position given to him through the organization, and showing respect to him and his title is showing respect to him for the work he's done to earn it, and the organization that granted it.  To be clear, he shows as much respect to everyone as he demands in return, so it's not like he's throwing around "I'm the master" as an ego trip.


----------



## wab25 (Jul 11, 2018)

skribs said:


> In Taekwondo, you wouldn't call yourself that unless you've earned the appropriate rank. At which point I don't see the problem with *demanding* people call you by the title the organization has bestowed upon you. I call my Master "Master" and I tell my students NOT to call me Master because I haven't earned it yet. (I say "I'm mister, I'm not a master yet...although I like the sound of that!"). When I have earned the title, you bet I'm going to *insist* on my students calling me Master.


This is just me... but I don't do well with people demanding or insisting that I call them something. If it is a title that they have earned, why do they need to demand or insist I use the title? Do they lose the title, if I don't use it? Or if they don't hear it enough? 

I choose to use titles. I do so, because I am trying to show respect. Its my choice. If you have to insist or demand the use of a title... you lose a portion of my respect.



skribs said:


> It's important to him because it's something he's earned, it's a position given to him through the organization, and showing respect to him and his title is showing respect to him for the work he's done to earn it, and the organization that granted it. To be clear, he shows as much respect to everyone as he *demands *in return, so it's not like he's throwing around "I'm the master" as an ego trip.


I do even less well with folks that demand my respect. If you have to demand it, it is not respect. 

In my view, respect can only be given. You can demand all you want, but you only get my respect when I choose to give it. You can do whatever you want, to earn my respect, but you still don't get it, until I choose to give you respect. It can't be true respect, unless I give it of my own free will.

The whole "sir" and "mister" thing, falls a little flat for me too. We are not in the military. We are in an after school program for adults. The places where I continue to go, we find ways to treat each other as adults and as people first. 

Each organization sets their own titles, and requirements and so forth. When I meet and train with these people, I use appropriate titles out of my respect for them. Those I respect most, introduce themselves: "Hi, I am Bill, nice to meet you." If I wanted to know their rank, I would look it up elsewhere. But, I would only do that, after figuring out how much I respect them, and then only out of idle curiosity. I have already determined if I want to spend more time on their mat. When someone does not need to hide behind a title or pretend we are in the military for no reason... I tend to respect them a bit more. They tend to let their ability stand for what it is. If they have put the time in, it will show in the quality of their technique and/or their teaching... and most importantly, the quality of their character.

As an instructor, the highest form of respect I want from my students, is to try to do what I ask them to, how I ask them to do it. They can "Hai Sensei!" me and "Yes Sir!" me all day... but if they won't attempt to change the details I ask them to change, how much do they really respect me as an instructor? I do the same when I am the student. First and foremost, I do my best to do exactly as I am being asked, while on their mat. I find it very disrespectful to say "Hai Sensei" with my lips while my actions on the mat say "I don't believe what you are teaching me enough to even try it."


----------



## skribs (Jul 11, 2018)

wab25 said:


> This is just me... but I don't do well with people demanding or insisting that I call them something. If it is a title that they have earned, why do they need to demand or insist I use the title? Do they lose the title, if I don't use it? Or if they don't hear it enough?
> 
> I choose to use titles. I do so, because I am trying to show respect. Its my choice. If you have to insist or demand the use of a title... you lose a portion of my respect.
> 
> ...



It's not A or B. Its not "you can call me sir or do what I say." Respect is shown at every level of the attitude and exchange.

It's not the military, but it ia formality, and being more formal is a way of being more respectful.  And usually when someone doesn't refer to my Master by his title, it is part of a lack of respect towards him. As in, they're being little snots and that's just part of it.

Keep in mind that about 80 to 90 percent of our students are under 12 years old.


----------



## Buka (Jul 11, 2018)

Little known fact from literature, in Hans Christian Anderson's story _The Emperor's New Clothes_, the Emporer's name was Johan Grandmaster.


----------



## pgsmith (Jul 12, 2018)

I was at a competition a number of years back, and a fellow came up to me in the bar and introduced himself as "Master". Needless to say I was less than impressed, since he didn't even offer to buy me a beer to make up for it.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jul 12, 2018)

In our system, Master is 4th-6th Dan, GM is 7th Dan or higher. Because that's what the head honchos decided, and there doesn't really need to be any other reason.
All Dan holders are Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms, or Sir/M'am. 
Outside class I'm just Mark. And I don't really care if people forget to use titles in class, either. Unless they forget with one of my seniors. Then I care.


----------



## skribs (Jul 12, 2018)

Dirty Dog said:


> In our system, Master is 4th-6th Dan, GM is 7th Dan or higher. Because that's what the head honchos decided, and there doesn't really need to be any other reason.
> All Dan holders are Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms, or Sir/M'am.
> Outside class I'm just Mark. And I don't really care if people forget to use titles in class, either. Unless they forget with one of my seniors. Then I care.



I think it's very interesting the difference between me and my Master (I am 15 years younger) and then my parents and my Master (my parents are 15-20 years older).  With my parents, there is a 2-way street of deference.  My parents respect him and his wisdom and experience as a Master, and he respects them and theirs as his elders.

With me, he is both my master and my elder.


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 12, 2018)

pgsmith said:


> I was at a competition a number of years back, and a fellow came up to me in the bar and introduced himself as "Master". Needless to say I was less than impressed, since he didn't even offer to buy me a beer to make up for it.


There was this guy who taught TKD as an after school program where I teach (academic school).  He introduced himself to EVERYONE as “Master John.”  Parents, faculty, etc.  Of course me being me, I couldn’t help but mutter “Master Bates is here” whenever he walked in.  Two teachers at the school actually thought that was his last name.  One teacher unknowingly mentioned “Master Bates” during a staff meeting (fortunately he wasn’t there).  Everyone knew exactly where it originated, even the ones who never heard me say it knew it had to come from me.

Yeah, I’ve got a reputation for absurdity.


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 12, 2018)

Why is it I have serious issues with calling anyone Master anything, yet I have zero problems with calling someone Master in another language, like Shihan (Japanese)?  I’d honestly not attend any school where I had to call anyone master, no matter how good the instruction hypothetically would be.

Edit: For the record, I’m white.  Many of my black friends say they’d never call anyone master; I understand and respect that.  My disdain for it has nothing to do with that.  My mind doesn’t go anywhere near there in a MA context.


----------



## _Simon_ (Jul 12, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> Why is it I have serious issues with calling anyone Master anything, yet I have zero problems with calling someone Master in another language, like Shihan (Japanese)?  I’d honestly not attend any school where I had to call anyone master, no matter how good the instruction hypothetically would be.
> 
> Edit: For the record, I’m white.  Many of my black friends say they’d never call anyone master; I understand and respect that.  My disdain for it has nothing to do with that.  My mind doesn’t go anywhere near there in a MA context.


Haha yeah I'd also find it weird to call someone master to be honest... but very comfortable with Shihan, Sensei and Sempai.

And nup I still can't not imagine you as being black (have always just associated your avatar with you hahaha XD).


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jul 12, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> Why is it I have serious issues with calling anyone Master anything, yet I have zero problems with calling someone Master in another language, like Shihan (Japanese)?  I’d honestly not attend any school where I had to call anyone master, no matter how good the instruction hypothetically would be.
> 
> Edit: For the record, I’m white.  Many of my black friends say they’d never call anyone master; I understand and respect that.  My disdain for it has nothing to do with that.  My mind doesn’t go anywhere near there in a MA context.



I'm going to guess it's because you have a western definition of the title stuck in your mind.


----------



## now disabled (Jul 13, 2018)

Dirty Dog said:


> I'm going to guess it's because you have a western definition of the title stuck in your mind.



That to me is a very very pertinent point, the difference in the definition and what goes with that between east and west

an example (only my opinion) the Japanese looked on the first westerners as barbarians and we looked on them as backward heathens ... Our western definition of barbarian differed from theirs and conversely until there were christian converts in Japan they had no idea of what a heathen was.

So different ideas yet the same words


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jul 13, 2018)

Headhunter said:


> I hate that term and refuse to use it. I don't see the point of it apart from ego flashing.



Everyone can decide things for themselves, but my GM would accept the title Master from Americans, but preferred GM, since he was one, so I called him that.  He did not designate himself a GM, but was promoted to that by other GM.  It required testing of the techniques of the art, and proofs of contributions to the art.  Calling a GM by that title was considered polite and proper.  To call them less implied impropriety and impoliteness.

But every art and practitioner gets to set their own standards and ranks/titles.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jul 13, 2018)

_Simon_ said:


> Haha yeah I'd also find it weird to call someone master to be honest... but very comfortable with Shihan, Sensei and Sempai.
> 
> And nup I still can't not imagine you as being black (have always just associated your avatar with you hahaha XD).



In the USA, for those who continue to make it so, there is baggage connected with the title 'Master,'  in Asia, at least in Japan and Korea, especially in the martial arts, it is a title of respect for a level of learning, and abilities of the art.  We have terms that imply that in the western world, such as 'Doctor' mentioned above, for those of a certain learning in the medical field.  In my understanding of some asian cultures, I have no problem calling some teachers Master or Grand Master.  But that's just me.



JR 137 said:


> Why is it I have serious issues with calling anyone Master anything, yet I have zero problems with calling someone Master in another language, like Shihan (Japanese)?  I’d honestly not attend any school where I had to call anyone master, no matter how good the instruction hypothetically would be.
> 
> Edit: For the record, I’m white.  Many of my black friends say they’d never call anyone master; I understand and respect that.  My disdain for it has nothing to do with that.  My mind doesn’t go anywhere near there in a MA context.



I don't know you but I would guess it is the baggage issue I mentioned above.  If you have a lot of black friends, you may choose to try and ensure you never hurt or anger them by using a title Master or Grand Master.  Or not, since you say not.  But that is just you.  Many are like you in the west, especially in the USA.  It is sort of part of our history and culture.

But consider - If you went to teach somewhere in asia, and got angry with students who insisted they should bow to you when they encountered you, and let them know that, what would you expect their reaction to be?


----------



## skribs (Jul 13, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> Why is it I have serious issues with calling anyone Master anything, yet I have zero problems with calling someone Master in another language, like Shihan (Japanese)?  I’d honestly not attend any school where I had to call anyone master, no matter how good the instruction hypothetically would be.
> 
> Edit: For the record, I’m white.  Many of my black friends say they’d never call anyone master; I understand and respect that.  My disdain for it has nothing to do with that.  My mind doesn’t go anywhere near there in a MA context.



I think of it like Master and Apprentice.  I grew up on Star Wars, so it's not hard to think of my Master the way Luke Skywalker thinks of Ben and Yoda.  In Star Wars, a Master is simply a Jedi Knight who has trained another.  I mean, after bachelor's degree comes Master's degree, and we don't have any trouble calling people the next part (Doctor).


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 13, 2018)

Dont forget about Grand Master "B"


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 13, 2018)

skribs said:


> I think of it like Master and Apprentice.  I grew up on Star Wars, so it's not hard to think of my Master the way Luke Skywalker thinks of Ben and Yoda.  In Star Wars, a Master is simply a Jedi Knight who has trained another.  I mean, after bachelor's degree comes Master's degree, and we don't have any trouble calling people the next part (Doctor).


I think of it exactly as you say.  IMO a “master” in MA is someone who’s mastered the art, relative to most others.

I think calling someone “master” has more implications of subservience to them rather than purely respect for them.  It’s not completely rational on my part, and I recognize it.  I just can’t bring myself to calling anyone that, ESPECIALLY when they demand it.

But “shihan” is the same term, just Japanese.  And I have absolutely no qualms with that term.  I don’t know the Korean, Chinese, etc terms, but I wouldn’t have problems with them either.  Yeah, I’m weird.  Fully admit it.


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 13, 2018)

oftheherd1 said:


> In the USA, for those who continue to make it so, there is baggage connected with the title 'Master,'  in Asia, at least in Japan and Korea, especially in the martial arts, it is a title of respect for a level of learning, and abilities of the art.  We have terms that imply that in the western world, such as 'Doctor' mentioned above, for those of a certain learning in the medical field.  In my understanding of some asian cultures, I have no problem calling some teachers Master or Grand Master.  But that's just me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don’t look at it as American history, baggage, not anything remotely close to that.  Race doesn’t enter the equation at all.

As in my previous post, I know why it’s used; it’s used to define so to speak someone’s accomplishments in MA.  To me personally it just has a connotation of subservience.  I know I’m wrong about that, but I just can’t change it no matter how much I try to rationalize the term.  Master in any other language is fine.  Again, I’m weird.  We all are in our own ways though.

If I ever achieve that rank, my title would be master in Japanese.  I wouldn’t be keen on people calling me anything other than JR, but etiquette is what it is and I respect it.


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 13, 2018)

_Simon_ said:


> Haha yeah I'd also find it weird to call someone master to be honest... but very comfortable with Shihan, Sensei and Sempai.
> 
> And nup I still can't not imagine you as being black (have always just associated your avatar with you hahaha XD).


So you like my avatar?  A certain clown here was calling me a bully a while back.  I found it so comical that I thought who’s my favorite bully of all time.  Immediately found a picture of Deebo from Friday, and the rest is history


----------



## _Simon_ (Jul 13, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> So you like my avatar?  A certain clown here was calling me a bully a while back.  I found it so comical that I thought who’s my favorite bully of all time.  Immediately found a picture of Deebo from Friday, and the rest is history


Hahaha ah so thaaaat's the story! Nice


----------



## Flying Crane (Jul 13, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> I think of it exactly as you say.  IMO a “master” in MA is someone who’s mastered the art, relative to most others.
> 
> I think calling someone “master” has more implications of subservience to them rather than purely respect for them.  It’s not completely rational on my part, and I recognize it.  I just can’t bring myself to calling anyone that, ESPECIALLY when they demand it.
> 
> But “shihan” is the same term, just Japanese.  And I have absolutely no qualms with that term.  I don’t know the Korean, Chinese, etc terms, but I wouldn’t have problems with them either.  Yeah, I’m weird.  Fully admit it.


In the Chinese martial arts, we don’t tend to us such titles.  Sifu means teacher, but it actually kind of means father, or someone who has gone before you, and it denotes a personal relationship between the two people.  Sigung means grandfather, and it is your teacher’s teacher.  Again, this is a specific relationship between the two people.  

While someone could be Sigung to you, that same person would be Sifu to your teacher (your Sifu).  So it is not a title to be worn.  It is a word that describes a relationship.

There are additional terms to denote seniority in the school, terms that essentially mean brother or sister (as classmates) as well as elder and eldest brother and sister and younger brother and sister (I cannot remember the terms).

There is also uncle or aunt, who would be your sifu’s classmate.

One person could be each of these titles to different people, all at the same time.  They could be Sigung to you, Sifu to your Sifu, brother to a classmate, younger brother to another classmate, uncle to his classmate’s student, etc., all at the same time.

There might be a term for Founder, I think it is Dai Sigung, but that means Great-Grandfather and is a bit more symbolic but it still denotes a relationship even if it is spanned over several generations.  But other than that, not much for the actual titles like Master or Grandmaster.

It drives me a little nuts when I see people referring to themselves as Sigung, thinking it means Grandmaster.  They want their own students to call them that.  That is like me calling my own father, “Grandfather”.  It just shows ignorance.


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 13, 2018)

Reedone816 said:


> That is why i said it only in my system.
> Of course beating it in accordance of the system.
> For example in taichi, i might be wrong here, to gauge the understanding of the system is by sparring in push hand / tui sao, so in the system i currently in, if the student able to draw in tui sao against the master, than he is equal to the master.
> But until now, that was never happened, so for the last two or three grandmaster generation, there was gap in knowledge, like the last one has over 20+ year knowledge gap with the late one, so for every generation, there was regression every time a grandmaster passed away.
> ...


Then that's a shame. I'm nowhere near a master, let alone a grandmaster, but I want my students to know more and do more with our art than I do.


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 13, 2018)

MI_martialist said:


> Because Doctor has standards that are universally recognized and is a DEGREE that one earns.  It is very different.


So... MD or PhD?  What about arts that label their most senior instructors as "professor?"

Titles are only as meaningful as the context and the source.  Without knowing both, it's merely a word.  

In my system, our 9th level black belts are our grandmasters.  Our chief instructor is our Grandmaster.  Subtle, but it's a meaningful distinction to us.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 13, 2018)

JadeDragon said:


> What do you think qualifies someone to be a Grandmaster?


In my MA system, we honor dead master as grand master.


----------



## dvcochran (Jul 13, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> Grand...as in grandfather.  A father who's offspring has also become a father.
> Thus a master who's students have also become masters.
> The hard part is to define master...good luck with that.


I have heard this before. Best way I have every heard it explained.


----------



## dvcochran (Jul 13, 2018)

skribs said:


> In KKW Taekwondo a Grand Master rank can be achieved at 7th or 8th degree black belt (I believe).  Which means you must have been a black belt for a minimum of 21-28 years, probably more if you didn't test every time you were able to.  If you assume Master at 5th degree and GM at 8th degree, that means 10 years to become a Master, and another 18 years after that to be a GM.  As someone who is 30 years old and going for 3rd Dan next month, at a minimum I would be 55 years old before qualifying to be a grand master.  I'd be old enough to be a grandfather (although probably won't be) and I would have spent more than half my life doing Taekwondo.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Certainly, it should be someone who is "all knowing" of their art. I do not consider a seasoned veteran in any MA automatically a GM. I have always been told gaining GM status has a lot to do with how you have grown your art and your community. I suppose that means there is a political element to it? For me, under no circumstance should someone self-name themselves Grand Master. There is just not enough substance to justify the title.


----------



## dvcochran (Jul 13, 2018)

pdg said:


> Oh, also...
> 
> Do I take it you're suggesting that nobody _earns_ the grand master title?



By all means they do. With the sheer volume of certified, qualified black belts on the planet, I think title needs to be maintained at the highest standard. I worked out with our GM long before the was a GM. I still catch myself calling him Master Shin. Many people do, and he shows no regard to it. Humble. I take special care to address him properly in more formal settings.
By rank I can be addressed Master, but choose and ask not to be. I haven't been directly involved in the day to day of our Dojangs for some time and just don't feel comfortable with the title. 
In my work life I have two Masters degrees and make damn sure you know it if I smell bs. 
In reality, it took me a total of 8 years to get my two engineering masters degrees. It took me 18 years in TKD.


----------



## skribs (Jul 13, 2018)

dvcochran said:


> Certainly, it should be someone who is "all knowing" of their art. I do not consider a seasoned veteran in any MA automatically a GM. I have always been told gaining GM status has a lot to do with how you have grown your art and your community. I suppose that means there is a political element to it? For me, under no circumstance should someone self-name themselves Grand Master. There is just not enough substance to justify the title.



In Taekwondo, the higher dan ranks are a bit political.  At least to my knowledge.  I'm not there yet!

What if you are the founder of a new art?  And not someone like me (2nd Dan in TKD and orange belt in another).  But someone who is Master rank in 2-3 arts already, and ranked black belt (or equivalent amount of training) in another 2-3 arts?


----------



## _Simon_ (Jul 14, 2018)

skribs said:


> In Taekwondo, the higher dan ranks are a bit political.  At least to my knowledge.  I'm not there yet!
> 
> What if you are the founder of a new art?  And not someone like me (2nd Dan in TKD and orange belt in another).  But someone who is Master rank in 2-3 arts already, and ranked black belt (or equivalent amount of training) in another 2-3 arts?


Then you're Super Saiyan Master


----------



## JadeDragon (Jul 14, 2018)

In China was told that the Grandmaster is the top of the tree, and has been elected to be in that position for his outstanding ability. He is the best person to fit the role of leader of that particular style. So there can only be one Grandmaster, who is the head of that specific style. You can't be the Grandmaster of Yang style in Birmingham or Manchester , there is only one Grandmaster who we all look up to. Sometimes we call out Master "Shi Fu" and his Master should then be "Shi Gong" (like Father and grandfather)

If you decide to call yourself Grandmaster you are saying that this is my system and I am the head of this system. So if I called myself a Grandmaster my system could no longer be Chen Style Tai Chi as there is already a Grandmaster for that. I would have to invent a name for my new system.

Now that it is more profitable to teach kung fu, you will see teachers pontificate themselves through their students hyping them as a grandmaster.  These teachers hype themselves as grandmasters, even when their sifu is the true Grandmaster of their style, even while their Sifu is still alive; which is very disrespectful in Traditional Chinese Martial Arts. This denigrates the term grandmaster and implies that the student is at the same ability of their Sifu. 

Click below for more:
Grandmaster


----------



## dvcochran (Jul 14, 2018)

skribs said:


> In Taekwondo, the higher dan ranks are a bit political.  At least to my knowledge.  I'm not there yet!
> 
> What if you are the founder of a new art?  And not someone like me (2nd Dan in TKD and orange belt in another).  But someone who is Master rank in 2-3 arts already, and ranked black belt (or equivalent amount of training) in another 2-3 arts?



I have a hard time seeing how someone who has worked out in "X" Martial Art for 4-6 years then moved on to something else, then moved on to something else, etc..., being a GM. It would be like having multiple Masters degrees from a College but deciding unilaterally you have a PhD. 
It can and has been done I am sure. Sometimes, but not always rightly so. If someone was really excellent at growing their brand and legitimizing their new style, and spent several years in the process, I feel it would work without coming off as a douche bag. 
Of course, new styles have to start somewhere. It takes an exceptional person to do it. I wonder how important their title was to them in the beginning? Or, how many current styles can be traced to one single person who was a GM from conception? 

In the engineering world I work in there aren't many times a PhD carries enough more weight to justify the time and expense. You do not need a PhD to get your P.E. stamp and that is kind of the "end all" requirement for some high end applications.


----------



## skribs (Jul 14, 2018)

dvcochran said:


> I have a hard time seeing how someone who has worked out in "X" Martial Art for 4-6 years then moved on to something else, then moved on to something else, etc..., being a GM. It would be like having multiple Masters degrees from a College but deciding unilaterally you have a PhD.
> It can and has been done I am sure. Sometimes, but not always rightly so. If someone was really excellent at growing their brand and legitimizing their new style, and spent several years in the process, I feel it would work without coming off as a douche bag.
> Of course, new styles have to start somewhere. It takes an exceptional person to do it. I wonder how important their title was to them in the beginning? Or, how many current styles can be traced to one single person who was a GM from conception?
> 
> In the engineering world I work in there aren't many times a PhD carries enough more weight to justify the time and expense. You do not need a PhD to get your P.E. stamp and that is kind of the "end all" requirement for some high end applications.



Master rank should take more than 4-6 years.  (Using TKD as my example again, because it's what I know best) it should take at least 12-15 years.


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 14, 2018)

dvcochran said:


> In the engineering world I work in there aren't many times a PhD carries enough more weight to justify the time and expense. You do not need a PhD to get your P.E. stamp and that is kind of the "end all" requirement for some high end applications.


Becoming a full professor (not adjunct nor the like) is probably the extent of PhD requirements in that field.  And even then, with the right work experience and knowledge, that can easily be waived with a master’s degree or if there’s a post-master’s certificate of some sort (some fields have this).  I guess it’s pretty much mandatory for a department head/chair.

But unless you want to teach it full-time and/or want some sort of extra oomph in your resume and credentials, I don’t see the point in many fields.  Some fields have a glass ceiling that doesn’t get broken without one though.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 14, 2018)

MI_martialist said:


> Because Doctor has standards that are universally recognized and is a DEGREE that one earns.  It is very different.


In both cases, it’s a title. If an organization seems someone to have met the standards for GM, why shouldn’t they use that term?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 14, 2018)

Headhunter said:


> I hate that term and refuse to use it. I don't see the point of it apart from ego flashing.


But if it’s what an association calls a given rank, what’s the ego issue?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 14, 2018)

Flying Crane said:


> People in the USA and other parts of the West seem to like titles and accolades that elevate them above the rest.
> 
> I think in China at least, they don’t have the same attachment nor see much use for them.  Unless they are marketing to the USA or other parts of the West.


Agreed. I see it in TJMA, with instructors introducing themselves as “Sensei Smith”.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 14, 2018)

wab25 said:


> The whole "sir" and "mister" thing, falls a little flat for me too. We are not in the military. We are in an after school program for adults. The places where I continue to go, we find ways to treat each other as adults and as people first.


I am comfortable on both sides of this. I came up in the Sir/Mr. environment, so it works for me. I usually maintain that same etiquette with my own students, just out of habit. I don’t really like it outside of class, and would be just as comfortable going by first name when teaching. I don’t see a problem with either way, and just call people by whatever term they use when introducing themselves. I do sometimes slip up and call people Sir/Ma’am in an informal class when visiting, but it usually goes unnoticed.


----------



## now disabled (Jul 14, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I am comfortable on both sides of this. I came up in the Sir/Mr. environment, so it works for me. I usually maintain that same etiquette with my own students, just out of habit. I don’t really like it outside of class, and would be just as comfortable going by first name when teaching. I don’t see a problem with either way, and just call people by whatever term they use when introducing themselves. I do sometimes slip up and call people Sir/Ma’am in an informal class when visiting, but it usually goes unnoticed.



That a fair point, the environment you grew up in and the dare I say the way folks were raised etc can make a difference in what you are comfortable with and just take things like Sir/Ma'am etc as common place.
I guess changing times 
I don't have a problem with a person being a Grandmaster as long as they have been awarded it by a recognized organisation. I have never met a grandmaster and even the shihan I have met never expected in class to be called that and they definitely out of class were just normal people (well a couple were old style lol and didn't socialize)


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 14, 2018)

Flying Crane said:


> That is like me calling my own father, “Grandfather”. It just shows ignorance.


Or a very odd family tree.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 14, 2018)

dvcochran said:


> Certainly, it should be someone who is "all knowing" of their art. I do not consider a seasoned veteran in any MA automatically a GM. I have always been told gaining GM status has a lot to do with how you have grown your art and your community. I suppose that means there is a political element to it? For me, under no circumstance should someone self-name themselves Grand Master. There is just not enough substance to justify the title.


“All knowing” isn’t achievable.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 14, 2018)

JadeDragon said:


> In China was told that the Grandmaster is the top of the tree, and has been elected to be in that position for his outstanding ability. He is the best person to fit the role of leader of that particular style. So there can only be one Grandmaster, who is the head of that specific style. You can't be the Grandmaster of Yang style in Birmingham or Manchester , there is only one Grandmaster who we all look up to. Sometimes we call out Master "Shi Fu" and his Master should then be "Shi Gong" (like Father and grandfather)
> 
> If you decide to call yourself Grandmaster you are saying that this is my system and I am the head of this system. So if I called myself a Grandmaster my system could no longer be Chen Style Tai Chi as there is already a Grandmaster for that. I would have to invent a name for my new system.
> 
> ...


That is one view of the title. If an organization uses it differently (as many do) then it has different meaning.


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 14, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Or a very odd family tree.


Being from the south, of course you’d go there with it.  
Stuff like that doesn’t cross most of us Yankees’ minds.


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 14, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Or a very odd family tree.


Can't resist...


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 14, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> Being from the south, of course you’d go there with it.
> Stuff like that doesn’t cross most of us Yankees’ minds.


Hey, every good comedian uses what he knows, man.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 14, 2018)

jks9199 said:


> Can't resist...


Well, it was going through my head when I posted that, so it seems only fair.


----------



## Reedone816 (Jul 14, 2018)

jks9199 said:


> Then that's a shame. I'm nowhere near a master, let alone a grandmaster, but I want my students to know more and do more with our art than I do.


Can't be helped really, each person experience is unique. If i put it in cook, even with the same recipe the taste can be different between the cook and its apprentice, only through experience may the apprentice may match the taste of the master, and it still probably different but not inferior.

Sent from my BV8000Pro using Tapatalk


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 15, 2018)

JadeDragon said:


> In China was told that the Grandmaster is the top of the tree, and has been elected to be in that position for his outstanding ability. He is the best person to fit the role of leader of that particular style. So there can only be one Grandmaster, who is the head of that specific style. You can't be the Grandmaster of Yang style in Birmingham or Manchester , there is only one Grandmaster who we all look up to. Sometimes we call out Master "Shi Fu" and his Master should then be "Shi Gong" (like Father and grandfather)
> 
> If you decide to call yourself Grandmaster you are saying that this is my system and I am the head of this system. So if I called myself a Grandmaster my system could no longer be Chen Style Tai Chi as there is already a Grandmaster for that. I would have to invent a name for my new system.
> 
> ...



Talked and trained with more than one Martial artists from China, some now in their 80s. There are no Grandmasters in China. One Chinese martial artists calls another a Grandmaster in Beijing and you are looking for a fight because you just called him fake.


----------



## Buka (Jul 15, 2018)

My mom considered herself somewhat formal. She refereed to me as "Master" until I was twelve. It was a form of address from the Vanderbilt Complete Book of Etiquette. Which is kind of comical when you're a little kid running around the projects having rock fights. 

When I got into the Arts I was introduced to the term Master in the way we all know it here. I thought it really cool. And the folks identified as Master seemed really, really good. Not that I actually saw them do anything, but they looked good. As the years passed I got to know and train with some of them. And they were really, really good. I addressed them as Master in the appropriate settings and, at least for most of them, by their name when we were just chilling.

More time goes by and I meet my first Grandmaster. Don't really remember who it was. But I figure whatever anybody wants to be refereed to is just fine by me. Especially in their world. I am a strong believer in Martial Protocol and adhere to it strictly, at least to the best of my ability.

More time goes by and I start meeting more and more Masters. Some of these newer Masters appear to be snot nosed little popcorns. Most have technique that would get my green belts a slap, but I do my best not to smile sarcastically and I politely nod. 

I meet more Grandmasters, too. Their gis seem to be a cross between old fashioned Movie Ushers uniforms and race car drivers logo suits. I don't really see them work out, but they do have a touch of pomposity about them that hints of royalty. Gotta' be something to that. But on the flip side, they don't appear to be in the physical shape I associate with a lifelong training of a Martial Art, and they're really not that old. But, hey, what do I know. 

I go with the flow. I address them anyway they want. As does every single student I've ever taught.


----------



## dvcochran (Jul 15, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I am comfortable on both sides of this. I came up in the Sir/Mr. environment, so it works for me. I usually maintain that same etiquette with my own students, just out of habit. I don’t really like it outside of class, and would be just as comfortable going by first name when teaching. I don’t see a problem with either way, and just call people by whatever term they use when introducing themselves. I do sometimes slip up and call people Sir/Ma’am in an informal class when visiting, but it usually goes unnoticed.


Sir/Ma'am is such an engrained part of my southern upbringing. It is such a part of my day to day vernacular I hope it goes unnoticed or at least understood. It is an intent of respect, doesn't matter if you are younger or older. If I think you deserve the respect, I will likely address you that way at some point. 
I hope we can all agree this world needs more respect for mankind. At the very least to understand it.


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 15, 2018)

Buka said:


> My mom considered herself somewhat formal. She refereed to me as "Master" until I was twelve. It was a form of address from the Vanderbilt Complete Book of Etiquette. Which is kind of comical when you're a little kid running around the projects having rock fights.
> 
> When I got into the Arts I was introduced to the term Master in the way we all know it here. I thought it really cool. And the folks identified as Master seemed really, really good. Not that I actually saw them do anything, but they looked good. As the years passed I got to know and train with some of them. And they were really, really good. I addressed them as Master in the appropriate settings and, at least for most of them, by their name when we were just chilling.
> 
> ...


Whenever I hear of a young boy being called master, I can only think of this





Haven’t seen that one in ages.  Such a great and underrated movie.  I was too young to get the “Master Bates” name when I saw it in the theaters.  And yes, that’s where I got “Master Bates” from in my TKD guy post.  I’m not that creative on my own.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 15, 2018)

dvcochran said:


> Sir/Ma'am is such an engrained part of my southern upbringing. It is such a part of my day to day vernacular I hope it goes unnoticed or at least understood. It is an intent of respect, doesn't matter if you are younger or older. If I think you deserve the respect, I will likely address you that way at some point.
> I hope we can all agree this world needs more respect for mankind. At the very least to understand it.


Though I grew up in the South, I grew up without that aspect - all my parents' friends were first-name only. But my MA upbringing has been almost entirely in schools that used Sir/Ma'am and Mr./Ms. - no first names with instructors.


----------



## dvcochran (Jul 16, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Though I grew up in the South, I grew up without that aspect - all my parents' friends were first-name only. But my MA upbringing has been almost entirely in schools that used Sir/Ma'am and Mr./Ms. - no first names with instructors.


It is definitely a generational thing. Protocol  and decorum just aren't as important it seems. Sometimes I think it is a good thing to get them out of the way in certain scenarios such as working in groups. It can help the creative element. Sometimes I see it under utilized when being a group leader, aka, supervisor, manager, team leader, instructor. etc... 
It is the few many screwing it up for the few analogy. The few insecure, overbearing jerks that demand it without justification make it hard to be on both the sending and receiving ends of decorum.


----------



## skribs (Jul 16, 2018)

dvcochran said:


> It is definitely a generational thing. Protocol  and decorum just aren't as important it seems. Sometimes I think it is a good thing to get them out of the way in certain scenarios such as working in groups. It can help the creative element. Sometimes I see it under utilized when being a group leader, aka, supervisor, manager, team leader, instructor. etc...
> It is the few many screwing it up for the few analogy. The few insecure, overbearing jerks that demand it without justification make it hard to be on both the sending and receiving ends of decorum.



In general, I think tone is far more important than the specific words you use.  If someone says "thanks", you can say "you're welcome" dripping with disdain and it's rude, but you can say "no problem" in a chipper tone and it comes across as pleasant.


----------



## lansao (Jul 18, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> Grand...as in grandfather.  A father who's offspring has also become a father.
> Thus a master who's students have also become masters.
> The hard part is to define master...good luck with that.



I agree with this and add it’s relative to each art’s level system.


----------



## pgsmith (Jul 19, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Agreed. I see it in TJMA, with instructors introducing themselves as “Sensei Smith”.



That would be AJMA, for Americanized Japanese Martial Arts. These are people that train in a traditional Japanese martial art, but no longer have a real connection with Japan. This means that they do what *they* consider correct, rather than what would actually be considered correct if their art was still Japanese. Anyone with a living connection with Japan in their Japanese martial arts knows that a person NEVER introduces themselves by a title such as sensei. In Japan, honorifics are bestowed by other people and never bestowed upon yourself, thus you might introduce someone else as Smith Sensei, but never yourself. Another easy mistake a lot of these same folks make is that the honorific always follows the name, and never precedes it.


----------



## skribs (Jul 19, 2018)

pgsmith said:


> That would be AJMA, for Americanized Japanese Martial Arts. These are people that train in a traditional Japanese martial art, but no longer have a real connection with Japan. This means that they do what *they* consider correct, rather than what would actually be considered correct if their art was still Japanese. Anyone with a living connection with Japan in their Japanese martial arts knows that a person NEVER introduces themselves by a title such as sensei. In Japan, honorifics are bestowed by other people and never bestowed upon yourself, thus you might introduce someone else as Smith Sensei, but never yourself. Another easy mistake a lot of these same folks make is that the honorific always follows the name, and never precedes it.



I don't really see how saying "I'm Sensei Smith" makes it AJMA instead of TJMA.  I mean, if that's the case, then virtually every martial art is divided based on what country it's being taught in.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 19, 2018)

skribs said:


> I don't really see how saying "I'm Sensei Smith" makes it AJMA instead of TJMA.  I mean, if that's the case, then virtually every martial art is divided based on what country it's being taught in.


That’s part of the whole question of what “traditional“ means in this context.


----------



## skribs (Jul 19, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> That’s part of the whole question of what “traditional“ means in this context.



Personally, I think Traditional refers more to the combat style of the art itself.  If I think of something being Americanized, I think of it either being:

Advertised to be a quick way to learn
Focus more on Hollywood style fighting than actual combat
Incorporate a lot of techniques you think more Americans would want, i.e. techniques common to MMA fighting, or punching styles more similar to boxing
I think saying "I'm Sensei Smith" makes sense for an American audience, but if that's all you're changing, the rest is still TJMA.


----------



## wab25 (Jul 19, 2018)

skribs said:


> Personally, I think Traditional refers more to the combat style of the art itself. If I think of something being Americanized, I think of it either being:
> 
> Advertised to be a quick way to learn
> Focus more on Hollywood style fighting than actual combat
> ...


That would not be my definition of Traditional Japanese Martial Arts. If we talk about a Koryu art, its not a quick way to learn, it does not look like Hollywood style fighting and it does not use MMA / Boxing techniques. But, I could also talk about wab-jitsu-do-te... It takes at least 40 years to learn, does not look like Hollywood fighting and does not use MMA / Boxing techniques. It is also decidedly not a Traditional Japanese Martial Art, even if I have my students address me as "Smith Sensei."

In my opinion, a better definition of Traditional Japanese Martial arts is either a koryu system, or system that can trace its roots back to a koryu system *and* one that trains in the same way as the koryu system it stems from. This leaves the door open for lots of disagreements over how strong the roots are, and how much of the koryu methods are preserved and all kinds of things. But, if you can not even make a claim of this type of relationship, then I don't believe you should try to claim being a Traditional Japanese Martial Art. I would argue that if you can't even make this claim to start with, you are easily not a Traditional Japanese Martial Art. An art claiming to be a grab bag of only the best Japanese named arts, from Japanese systems, is not a claim of being a Traditional Japanese Martial Art.

Thats just my opinion though.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 19, 2018)

skribs said:


> Personally, I think Traditional refers more to the combat style of the art itself.  If I think of something being Americanized, I think of it either being:
> 
> Advertised to be a quick way to learn
> Focus more on Hollywood style fighting than actual combat
> ...


I can't really agree with the second. That's more "commercialized" (the use of that word with the negative connotation) than "Americanized". And the third would apply to any group - include things they're interested in or that fit their usage.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 19, 2018)

wab25 said:


> That would not be my definition of Traditional Japanese Martial Arts. If we talk about a Koryu art, its not a quick way to learn, it does not look like Hollywood style fighting and it does not use MMA / Boxing techniques. But, I could also talk about wab-jitsu-do-te... It takes at least 40 years to learn, does not look like Hollywood fighting and does not use MMA / Boxing techniques. It is also decidedly not a Traditional Japanese Martial Art, even if I have my students address me as "Smith Sensei."
> 
> In my opinion, a better definition of Traditional Japanese Martial arts is either a koryu system, or system that can trace its roots back to a koryu system *and* one that trains in the same way as the koryu system it stems from. This leaves the door open for lots of disagreements over how strong the roots are, and how much of the koryu methods are preserved and all kinds of things. But, if you can not even make a claim of this type of relationship, then I don't believe you should try to claim being a Traditional Japanese Martial Art. I would argue that if you can't even make this claim to start with, you are easily not a Traditional Japanese Martial Art. An art claiming to be a grab bag of only the best Japanese named arts, from Japanese systems, is not a claim of being a Traditional Japanese Martial Art.
> 
> Thats just my opinion though.


And I think most koryu folks would agree. Even if we accepted Daito-ryu as koryu (which we probably shouldn't, but let's do so for this one sentence), NGA doesn't train very closely to the way Daito-ryu traditionally (see, there's that word again) did. So NGA wouldn't be "traditional" for most Koryu folks. But most NGA practitioners consider it a fairly traditional art, I'd think. It's all about the frame of reference, which makes it really hard to discuss "traditional" arts, unless the person starting the discussion clarifies what that word is being used for in that context.


----------



## wab25 (Jul 20, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> And I think most koryu folks would agree. Even if we accepted Daito-ryu as koryu (which we probably shouldn't, but let's do so for this one sentence), NGA doesn't train very closely to the way Daito-ryu traditionally (see, there's that word again) did. So NGA wouldn't be "traditional" for most Koryu folks. But most NGA practitioners consider it a fairly traditional art, I'd think. It's all about the frame of reference, which makes it really hard to discuss "traditional" arts, unless the person starting the discussion clarifies what that word is being used for in that context.


I agree with you. The point I was trying to make was that an art could easily satisfy the 3 points given, and be no where near a "Traditional" art. Those points don't help define what a traditional art is. The "discussions" about these arts you mention (and others) and whether they are traditional or not, is around their claims to a clear lineage and connection to koryu arts, at least somewhere in their history. I was not trying to open a "discussion" about which arts are or are not "traditional." I was trying to point out that those "discussions" are based around the connections and the history of the art and people in the art. Those "discussions" are *not* based around how easy the art is to learn, whether the moves look like Hollywood fight scenes or whether the moves are popularly used in MMA.

Basically, if you want to call something "traditional" then the history of those traditions would be the determining factor, as to whether or not it was "traditional." Having a Christmas tree in December is "traditional" not because it takes years to learn how to do it... but because of the history of people doing it, and passing that technique down to each new generation.


----------



## skribs (Jul 20, 2018)

wab25 said:


> I agree with you. The point I was trying to make was that an art could easily satisfy the 3 points given, and be no where near a "Traditional" art. Those points don't help define what a traditional art is. The "discussions" about these arts you mention (and others) and whether they are traditional or not, is around their claims to a clear lineage and connection to koryu arts, at least somewhere in their history. I was not trying to open a "discussion" about which arts are or are not "traditional." I was trying to point out that those "discussions" are based around the connections and the history of the art and people in the art. Those "discussions" are *not* based around how easy the art is to learn, whether the moves look like Hollywood fight scenes or whether the moves are popularly used in MMA.
> 
> Basically, if you want to call something "traditional" then the history of those traditions would be the determining factor, as to whether or not it was "traditional." Having a Christmas tree in December is "traditional" not because it takes years to learn how to do it... but because of the history of people doing it, and passing that technique down to each new generation.



I am saying that's what happens to take a TMA and make it more Americanized.  Not that those are general rules of thumb for what a TMA is.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jul 20, 2018)

skribs said:


> Personally, I think Traditional refers more to the combat style of the art itself.  If I think of something being Americanized, I think of it either being:
> 
> Advertised to be a quick way to learn
> Focus more on Hollywood style fighting than actual combat
> ...



Actually, I can agree with that.  A language has the option/right to express itself as it best understands what it wants to say.  When teaching US citizens, my GM used English for counting as often as not, and certainly used English to identify techniques, usually by class (such as arm block #1) and number.  His desire was to teach Hapkido, not Korean.  But the Hapkido he taught was afik traditional, depending of course on your definition of traditional for a relatively young art.


----------



## skribs (Jul 20, 2018)

oftheherd1 said:


> Actually, I can agree with that.  A language has the option/right to express itself as it best understands what it wants to say.  When teaching US citizens, my GM used English for counting as often as not, and certainly used English to identify techniques, usually by class (such as arm block #1) and number.  His desire was to teach Hapkido, not Korean.



We count in English in our school if there's a new student.  And often the kids who haven't learned Korean yet will count in English when we have them count 1-by-1 during stretching.  We also love hearing other languages.  We've had Japanese, Chinese, Spanish, French, German, Russian (and a Ukrainian dialect of it) , Arabic, Hebrew, Cambodian, Tagalog, Vietnamese, and Klingon.

The last one was me.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jul 20, 2018)

skribs said:


> We count in English in our school if there's a new student.  And often the kids who haven't learned Korean yet will count in English when we have them count 1-by-1 during stretching.  We also love hearing other languages.  We've had Japanese, Chinese, Spanish, French, German, Russian (and a Ukrainian dialect of it) , Arabic, Hebrew, Cambodian, Tagalog, Vietnamese, and Klingon.
> 
> The last one was me.



Were you required to check your disrupter at the door?  (Sorry couldn't resist )


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 20, 2018)

this is a great thread...  from now on i will be requiring all new students to call me Master John or Sensei John.  
_then i will sit back and see how long it takes them to figure out that my names not John.   _


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 20, 2018)

To throw another wrench into this whole title, Americanized, Japanese, etc. mix...

People say “that’s not how it’s done in Japan” “Japanese people don’t say that” etc.  Funny thing is a lot of actual Japanese karate instructors do a lot of the things I’ve heard discussed as not being done.  Tadashi Nakamura was born and raised in Japan.  He was sent to the US by Mas Oyama when he was in his mid-late 20s.  He assigns specific titles to specific ranks rather than everyone being “sensei.”  He refers to and calls my teacher “Shuseki Shihan Don” another teacher at my school “Jun Shihan Scott” etc.  Kyokushin does more or less the same.  So do others.

Saying a certain culture/ethnicity does and doesn’t do any specific thing is just flat out incorrect.  Saying something like “no Japanese person does that” is wrong.  That would be no different than saying “no American does this” or “every American does that.”

Sure, some things are far more common than others, but saying everyone in a specific culture does or doesn’t do something is painting with a brush that’s far too broad.


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 20, 2018)

pgsmith said:


> That would be AJMA, for Americanized Japanese Martial Arts. These are people that train in a traditional Japanese martial art, but no longer have a real connection with Japan. This means that they do what *they* consider correct, rather than what would actually be considered correct if their art was still Japanese. Anyone with a living connection with Japan in their Japanese martial arts knows that a person NEVER introduces themselves by a title such as sensei. In Japan, honorifics are bestowed by other people and never bestowed upon yourself, thus you might introduce someone else as Smith Sensei, but never yourself. Another easy mistake a lot of these same folks make is that the honorific always follows the name, and never precedes it.


Like I said in my previous post, you’re painting with an awfully broad brush here.

Shokei Matsui, head of Kyokushinkaikan IKO1 in Tokyo, Japan.  And many others within the organization...

Kancho & Committee Member | IKO Kyokushinkaikan

Shigeru Oyama of World Oyama karate and Mitsugu Sakai (owner and CI of this dojo)...
Instructors


----------



## pgsmith (Jul 20, 2018)

skribs said:


> I think saying "I'm Sensei Smith" makes sense for an American audience, but if that's all you're changing, the rest is still TJMA.



While I agree that "traditional" is totally open to interpretation, I disagree that something should call itself traditional while ignoring the traditions which it supposedly uses.



JR 137 said:


> He assigns specific titles to specific ranks rather than everyone being “sensei.” He refers to and calls my teacher “Shuseki Shihan Don” another teacher at my school “Jun Shihan Scott” etc. Kyokushin does more or less the same. So do others.



  This does not disagree with what I pointed out earlier, it simply delves deeper into Japanese society than most people, whether they study a Japanese martial art or not, are interested in. Shuseki Shihan and Jun Shihan are earned ranks and specific titles. It is akin to having someone refer to you as "Dr. JR" because you've earned a PhD. Still though, he is referring to _others_ in this manner. It's considered rude and  presumptuous to refer to *yourself* by honorifics. I would be willing to bet money that you've never heard him refer to _himself_ as Shihan Nakamura. 

  You are correct though in that attempting to say "always" and "never" is way too broad of a brush, and for that I apologize. I should have said "usually", or "almost always" as there are "almost always" exceptions to any rule.


----------



## pgsmith (Jul 20, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> Like I said in my previous post, you’re painting with an awfully broad brush here.
> 
> Shokei Matsui, head of Kyokushinkaikan IKO1 in Tokyo, Japan. And many others within the organization...
> 
> ...



Also, don't make the mistake of thinking that what you find on the internet is indicative of what would actually be used in person. Internet web sites, articles, and Wikipedia pages are "usually" written by a third person.


----------



## skribs (Jul 20, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> this is a great thread...  from now on i will be requiring all new students to call me Master John or Sensei John.
> _then i will sit back and see how long it takes them to figure out that my names not John.   _





pgsmith said:


> While I agree that "traditional" is totally open to interpretation, I disagree that something should call itself traditional while ignoring the traditions which it supposedly uses.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If the martial art aspect is the same, but some of the words are different, I don't see it as breaking from the traditional training.  How authentic a recreation of the experience are you expecting?  Should I pay my class tuition with the currency of Japan in that era?


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 20, 2018)

pgsmith said:


> While I agree that "traditional" is totally open to interpretation, I disagree that something should call itself traditional while ignoring the traditions which it supposedly uses.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Is “Kaicho” an honorific?

The World Seido Karate Organization in New York City

First video, approximately 30 seconds in.   And shortly thereafter with his son, “Nidaime” (second in line/vice chairman).  

My point actually wasn’t introducing themselves with a title, it was more so the order - Sensei Joe vs Joe Sensei.  And just an overall post to the general public.

Everyone I’ve met in Seido has introduced themselves by their name, not their title, for what it’s worth.


----------



## pgsmith (Jul 20, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> Is “Kaicho” an honorific?
> 
> The World Seido Karate Organization in New York City
> 
> ...



  Kaicho means President or Chairman. It is the acknowledged head of an organization.

  I get what you're saying, it just doesn't change my original thoughts on it. The videos you are referring to here are narrated by some obviously American fellow, and we've no idea who wrote the text for him to narrate.

  This conversation has made me think way back to an early job as Hotel maintenance. The hotel manager spoke fluent Spanish, so he could talk with the maintenance and housekeeping folks as they were all Mexican (El Paso, Texas). However, he spoke Spanish with a very strong and definite Minnesota accent. The staff used to ask him random questions just so they could listen to him talk. He was totally understandable, it just sounded pretty weird.    That's the same sort of feeling I get.



skribs said:


> If the martial art aspect is the same, but some of the words are different, I don't see it as breaking from the traditional training. How authentic a recreation of the experience are you expecting? Should I pay my class tuition with the currency of Japan in that era?



  Nope, but I think you should make some more ridiculous assertions to get it all out of your system. 

  So how do you judge if the martial art aspects are the same and it's only the words that have changed? Not saying they aren't as I've no way of knowing, just asking.


----------



## _Simon_ (Jul 20, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> He refers to and calls my teacher “Shuseki Shihan Don” another teacher at my school “Jun Shihan Scott” etc.  Kyokushin does more or less the same.  So do others.



Ah yep I remember when I went to check out a Seido dojo I was confused with the titles! There was Jun Shihan, Kyoshi.. there seem more titles than in Kyokushin, but there are still a few more than just Sensei.

Ours was
1st-2nd Dan: Sempai
3rd-4th Dan: Sensei
5th-6th Dan: Shiha
Then up from there is Hanshi and Kancho, unsure where they fall exactly, Kancho obviously meaning more the president or head of the organisation.

And our branch chief was honoured with the title Shihancho, meaning chief of the Shihans  (moreso because the immense contribution and effort he put into developing and teaching Kyokushin over the many years)


----------



## Buka (Jul 20, 2018)

skribs said:


> Personally, I think Traditional refers more to the combat style of the art itself.  If I think of something being Americanized, I think of it either being:
> 
> Advertised to be a quick way to learn
> Focus more on Hollywood style fighting than actual combat
> ...




Start of rant, buckle up.

Whoa, whoa, WHOA! Just hold the F on there, bro. I've dedicated forty five years of my life to American Karate, and I'm pretty sure American Karate is as _Americanized_ as a Martial Art can get. "Actual combat" my ****.

Ain't nothing quick about the way we learn. And rather than advertise that, we tell prospective students just the opposite.

Focus on Hollywood style fighting? I've worked in Hollywood, choreographed fight scenes and written movies, have you? Ain't got nothing to do with American Karate, or Americanized anything. 

I could not give a rat's ask about what Americans want. I don' give a rat's ask what anyone wants. However, many of the things we happen to do can be found in MMA, and yes, we, amongst other ways, punch a lot like boxers. You know why? Because we fight a lot in training and find it effective. 

I have years in TKD as well. High level I like to think. But we never sold Americanized anything short. Un uh.

Okay, I caught my breath now. Rant over. Us Americanized folks get all up in arms over certain things having to do with our country.

And...my wife wants to go to Seattle next year, she's never been. That ain't to far from you I don't think. Maybe we can hook up and get all Americanized over some fine food.


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 20, 2018)

pgsmith said:


> Kaicho means President or Chairman. It is the acknowledged head of an organization.
> 
> I get what you're saying, it just doesn't change my original thoughts on it. The videos you are referring to here are narrated by some obviously American fellow, and we've no idea who wrote the text for him to narrate.
> 
> ...



I really don’t want to keep this going more than it really needs to.  And I’m pretty sure our opinions are significantly closer than what it would appear to be through this medium, however...

It is narrated by “Nidaime” Akira Nakamura, Tadashi Nakamura’s son.  I’m quite sure he and his father scripted it,  ut I can’t say that with 100% certainty.  Nidaime Nakamura was born and raised here, but he is very much Japanese.  He’s a very well spoken and articulate person, hence sounding like it may have been scripted.

And I’m aware of Kaicho’s translation into English.  I just wasn’t sure if that’s looked at the same way as other titles such as Shihan, Hanshi, etc., or if it’s more freely used, if that makes sense.  I guess what I’m saying is Kaicho isn’t strictly a MA title (I know the other ones aren’t either, but Kaicho is used far more outside MA than the others), so I don’t know if using Kaicho is looked at the same way or more acceptable.


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 20, 2018)

_Simon_ said:


> Ah yep I remember when I went to check out a Seido dojo I was confused with the titles! There was Jun Shihan, Kyoshi.. there seem more titles than in Kyokushin, but there are still a few more than just Sensei.
> 
> Ours was
> 1st-2nd Dan: Sempai
> ...


There’s a specific title to each rank from 3rd dan-8th dan.  Nakamura is 9th dan, there are 4 8th dans, and I think 5 or 6 7th dans in the organization.

According to my teacher there were originally I think 3 titles - Shihan, Sensei, and Senpai.  As the organization grew and expanded worldwide, and more people were getting up there in rank, Nakamura wanted a way to differentiate his senior-most students like Charles Martin and William Oliver from the rest.  He started adding a few titles, and it sort of evolved into every dan rank from 3rd up getting their own title. 

After Kaicho...
8th dan - Hanshi
7th dan - Shuseki Shihan
6th dan - Jun Shihan/Sei Shihan (depending on time in grade)
5th dan - Kyoshi
4th dan - Sensei
3rd dan - Senpai

1st and 2nd dans are called Senpai in their dojo, but it’s not an official title for them.  3rd dan is called Senpai everywhere in the organization.

I think it’s a bit overkill with the titles, but in the whole grand scheme of things it really doesn’t matter.  It’s not like a title changes what’s being done nor taught.  My CI has said a few times that he misses being called sensei.  Protocol/etiquette is what it is, and again the titles don’t really change what’s going on.  And there’s very very few with the top 3 titles when you take into account that there’s over 20,000 active members in the organization.


----------



## _Simon_ (Jul 21, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> There’s a specific title to each rank from 3rd dan-8th dan.  Nakamura is 9th dan, there are 4 8th dans, and I think 5 or 6 7th dans in the organization.
> 
> According to my teacher there were originally I think 3 titles - Shihan, Sensei, and Senpai.  As the organization grew and expanded worldwide, and more people were getting up there in rank, Nakamura wanted a way to differentiate his senior-most students like Charles Martin and William Oliver from the rest.  He started adding a few titles, and it sort of evolved into every dan rank from 3rd up getting their own title.
> 
> ...



Ah yep makes sense, and exactly it doesn't change anything taught etc, but practically I can see why he did that. Grand scheme of things it's no issue, as alot of masters gone would say: "Just train!"


----------



## Buka (Jul 21, 2018)

God, I love this place.


----------



## dvcochran (Jul 21, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> I really don’t want to keep this going more than it really needs to.  And I’m pretty sure our opinions are significantly closer than what it would appear to be through this medium, however...
> 
> It is narrated by “Nidaime” Akira Nakamura, Tadashi Nakamura’s son.  I’m quite sure he and his father scripted it,  ut I can’t say that with 100% certainty.  Nidaime Nakamura was born and raised here, but he is very much Japanese.  He’s a very well spoken and articulate person, hence sounding like it may have been scripted.
> 
> And I’m aware of Kaicho’s translation into English.  I just wasn’t sure if that’s looked at the same way as other titles such as Shihan, Hanshi, etc., or if it’s more freely used, if that makes sense.  I guess what I’m saying is Kaicho isn’t strictly a MA title (I know the other ones aren’t either, but Kaicho is used far more outside MA than the others), so I don’t know if using Kaicho is looked at the same way or more acceptable.


I am way outside my purview but a person of another decent ,Japanese in this discussion, born and raised in the US may be 100% Japanese by blood but they will surely have quite a bit of American influence and tendencies. IMHO


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 21, 2018)

dvcochran said:


> I am way outside my purview but a person of another decent ,Japanese in this discussion, born and raised in the US may be 100% Japanese by blood but they will surely have quite a bit of American influence and tendencies. IMHO


True.  But growing up in a household where both parents and all siblings are speaking Japanese, I’d say he’s well aware of the customs and traditions.

I was born and raised here.  My father and all of his side of the family spoke nothing but Armenian to me until I was around 20 or so.  I’m well aware of what’s acceptable and not acceptable in my culture.

Same for anyone else in his and my shoes.


----------



## Balrog (Jul 26, 2018)

JadeDragon said:


> What do you think qualifies someone to be a Grandmaster?


There are several methods.  Number of students overall, number of students who have become masters, whatever.

I personally think that we are always students.  A Master is just someone who is a really good student.  A Grandmaster is someone who is a really, really, really good student.


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 26, 2018)

Balrog said:


> There are several methods.  Number of students overall, number of students who have become masters, whatever.
> 
> I personally think that we are always students.  A Master is just someone who is a really good student.  A Grandmaster is someone who is a really, really, really good student.


A grandmaster is someone who never stopped training.  

I just wanted to take one of those cheesy black belt motivational quotes and make it my own


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 26, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> A grandmaster is someone who never stopped training.
> 
> I just wanted to take one of those cheesy black belt motivational quotes and make it my own


A black belt is a white belt who wouldn't quit.

An instructor is a black belt who wouldn't shut up.


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 26, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> A black belt is a white belt who wouldn't quit.
> 
> An instructor is a black belt who wouldn't shut up.


So I guess by progression...

A master is an instructor who wouldn’t stop beating up on his underling instructors.  

A grandmaster is a master who wouldn’t stop hazing the underling masters.


----------



## _Simon_ (Jul 26, 2018)

A black belt is a student who loves to learn and is so humble like a flower opening to the sun's rays!

A grandmaster is a rainbow who learns from every colour of the spectrum and doesn't discard anything and never ever gives up and falls down but gets back up, oh and drinks unicorn tears!


(... too much? XD)


----------



## JR 137 (Jul 26, 2018)

_Simon_ said:


> A black belt is a student who loves to learn and is so humble like a flower opening to the sun's rays!
> 
> A grandmaster is a rainbow who learns from every colour of the spectrum and doesn't discard anything and never ever gives up and falls down but gets back up, oh and drinks unicorn tears!
> 
> ...


Yeah, just a little bit too much.  Drop the unicorn tears part and I think you’re good to go.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 27, 2018)

_Simon_ said:


> A black belt is a student who loves to learn and is so humble like a flower opening to the sun's rays!
> 
> A grandmaster is a rainbow who learns from every colour of the spectrum and doesn't discard anything and never ever gives up and falls down but gets back up, oh and drinks unicorn tears!
> 
> ...


I'm seriously going to put all of these on signs and put them up in my training space.


----------



## _Simon_ (Jul 27, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I'm seriously going to put all of these on signs and put them up in my training space.


Please do! You should put these up too:

There are too many good ones, I'd just better stop now!


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 31, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> Why is it I have serious issues with calling anyone Master anything, yet I have zero problems with calling someone Master in another language, like Shihan (Japanese)?  I’d honestly not attend any school where I had to call anyone master, no matter how good the instruction hypothetically would be.
> 
> Edit: For the record, I’m white.  Many of my black friends say they’d never call anyone master; I understand and respect that.  My disdain for it has nothing to do with that.  My mind doesn’t go anywhere near there in a MA context.



Shihan,  "Teacher of teachers" or "Model Instructor"
Typically, this is a Title (honorific) that is awarded, and usually the last in the Renshi, Kyoshi, Shihan sequence.

I don't think it would be fair to translate Shihan as master per se. At least in a formal sense.


----------



## dvcochran (Jul 31, 2018)

TSDTexan said:


> Shihan,  "Teacher of teachers" or "Model Instructor"
> Typically, this is a Title (honorific) that is awarded, and usually the last in the Renshi, Kyoshi, Shihan sequence.
> 
> I don't think it would be fair to translate Shihan as master per se. At least in a formal sense.


Like your edit. But I would stop short of saying never until you had real time under a legitimate master. 
That said, I have two Masters degrees. Other than putting them at the end of my name on LinkedIn they are seldom used. The exception is in meetings where some insecure knucklehead has to know your credentials to feel like you know what you are talking about. Frankly they have little to do with my business expertise.


----------



## Martial D (Jul 31, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> Then again whenever I see Grandmaster, I always think of this Grandmaster first.  The truest Grandmaster of them all...
> View attachment 21585
> GRANDMASTER FLASH!


I was literally digging up a GMF video to post when I saw this.


----------

