# Where do they get rank?



## iron_ox (Nov 13, 2004)

Hello all,

Just curious, can someone tell me where Seo, In Sun got his rank above third dan?  He lists in his bio that in 1958 he got a first dan from Choi, Yong Sul, then in 1961 a third dan in Hapkido.

How is he qualified to run a Hapkido organization with this rank, or does someone have information about his rank in Hapkido (not Kuk Sool Won) after 1961.  Remember, Kuk Sool Won (so they have told us for 20+ years) is not Hapkido - so rank there is not Hapkido rank - or is it?


----------



## Disco (Nov 14, 2004)

http://www.kidohae.com/chairman.htm

Found this, I think all this will do is open the door to more questions. Especially the time frame between 1961 & 1966.


----------



## iron_ox (Nov 14, 2004)

Hello Mike,

Exactly, where else did he get rank?


----------



## Paul B (Nov 14, 2004)

Why don't you call and ask? His son has a Dojang in Freemont Ca. if that helps. I am sure he would be willing to talk to you guys.


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 14, 2004)

Actually, I DID ask Steve (Seo) this very question, and was essentially told that if I had serious doubts about the organization that maybe this was not the organization for me. No answer to my original question just a veiled comment asking me to "watch my step". 

With no tradition of the sort of succession that people in the Japanese culture enjoy in their martial art organizational model its not too surprising that Koreans play rather fast and loose with such things. Are we then surprised when their Western disciples likewise play fast and loose? FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## kwanjang (Nov 14, 2004)

Better yet, attend one of his seminars and SEE how he moves.  He just did a seminar in the Chicago area, and I did not see any of you there to personally get on the mat with him to check out his validity.  I believe he will be back for an encore next year, and I am VERY sure he would be more than willing to "share" his technique.  Any problems with that????  

Paper can tell you just so much; however, what is done on the mat tells the real story.  I am beginning to think that some of you folks forget what really counts, because you seem to be soooo preoccupied with paper trails.

I have on more than one occasion stated my lineage and time in rank publicly, and I am here to tell you that GM Seo is ten times the technician I am regardless of what papers he can produce.  It is but one reason why I am happy to learn from him any day.  

Not hot under the collar here, just wondering why we have to resort to creating doubt when it is sooo easy to get on the mat with him.  His Dojang in Korea is open to all visitors, and, unless you come in with an attitude, you will be treated with respect regardless of what Kwan you belong to.


----------



## Paul B (Nov 14, 2004)

QUOTE] I believe he will be back for an encore next year, and I am VERY sure he would be more than willing to "share" his technique. Any problems with that???? [/QUOTE] 
Did you get any date on that,Mr. Timmerman? and....lol. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





I'll see you there!


----------



## Miles (Nov 14, 2004)

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> With no tradition of the sort of succession that people in the Japanese culture enjoy in their martial art organizational model its not too surprising that Koreans play rather fast and loose with such things. Are we then surprised when their Western disciples likewise play fast and loose? FWIW.


Actually, the Japanese did the same thing.  In Harry Cook's "Precise History of Shotokan Karate", he states that, "Until 1964, the highest grades awarded in Shotokan had been 5th dan, but by May 1964, both Masatoshi Nakayama and Minoru Miyata were graded to 8th dan and manyother seniors were awarded 6th and 7th dans." (P175)

The Okinawans did likewise.  In Seikichi Toguchi's "Okinawan Goju-Ryu II", he writes, "Since Miyagi died suddenly the following year (1953), none of us received dan ranking from him.  The truth of the matter is that we, his senior students, promoted each other in an effort to promote goju-ryu." (Pp 24-25)

In TKD there is a centralized headquarters-Kukkiwon.  The same is not true for hapkido, but there are several grandmasters whose status really is above rank.  The bottom line regardless of style should always be what one can do on the mat.

Miles


----------



## kwanjang (Nov 14, 2004)

Hello Paul:
I did not get news on that yet, but I'll be there


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 14, 2004)

Dear Rudy: 

Perhaps I am missing something, so I share the following with some care. All the same I think there is some part of the message that is being lost here and I, for my part, believe it needs to be said. Please bear with me. 

In the kwan to which I belong, as well as the organization (WHF) that proceeds from it the highest TECHNICAL rank (rank for which one tests and reflects ones' technical ability and accumin) is 7th dan. 8th, 9th and 10th dan all reflect organizational, managerial or supervisory positions. These positions may (or may not) have been preceeded by a range of technical ranks. Thats not for me to say as it is GM Myung, not I, who assigns these ranks. The reason that I raise any of this is that I believe that at least in the kwan to which I belong I have a reasonable expectation of leadership from the people to whom GM Myung assigns ranks 8 through 10. Now, whether it is fair or not, I believe that I am also justified in expecting some level of leadership from ANYONE who claims to have an 8th, 9th or 10th degree BB, and for me this goes beyong the matter of advertising ranks, bestowing credentials or assigning standing. 

As far as being competent as a technician and a teacher, I must tell you in all candor that I absolutely expect NOTHING Less from anyone who represents themselves as a 8th, 9th or 10th degree BB. That is not even worthy of comment for me. Where I am challenging leadership in the Hapkido arts is to use their supposed authority to bring individuals together under some aegis OTHER THAN their own particular brandname, while maintaining some level of authenticity. 

I think I can state without fear of contradiction that people such as GM-s Suh, Ji, Lee and Kimm (among many others) have all done their best to make a living from the KMA. On those occasions they have sought to bring people together but only under their own marque. As a Hapkido practitioner I think I deserved better than their unique selfish take on how posterity would frame them. People contributing on this Net (and others) are no longer young, starry-eyed gueppies, easily swayed by big names and oral traditions. Speaking for myself I fully expect that big names and big talk will be supported by big evidence. Failing that I am left to wonder how such individuals are any different from the most recent crop of profit-mongers. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD (Nov 14, 2004)

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Rudy:
> 
> Perhaps I am missing something, so I share the following with some care. All the same I think there is some part of the message that is being lost here and I, for my part, believe it needs to be said. Please bear with me.
> 
> ...


Bruce,

You have a few good points, but for example it's alledged Ji Han Jae only was a 3rd dan from Choi Yong Sool but he promoted most of the highest HKD Masters in the world including H.S. Myung, He Young Kimm, and many others I won't name for the list is too long.

My point is that a 3rd dan is promoting people to 5,6,7,8, and 9th dans after claiming to found his own system Hapkido based on a 3rd Dan from someone else.

To date no one will agrue Masters Ji's skill and knowledge it's always been beyond question.

So skill and respect out weighs all the paper trails.


----------



## Disco (Nov 14, 2004)

I know this is going to p**s off some people, but the door has been pushed open. From my viewpoint, I tend to see a big double standard here. If an American 3rd Dan up and started his own organization, he would be roasted, toasted and unboasted until somebody closed the thread. It would also be highly doubtful that his technical expertise would be part of the discussion. It's no secret that I don't have any warm and fuzzy's for the way Korean's in general, conduct business within the martial arts world they control. I've seen way to much stuff happen to ever be objective again. This thread was started with a valid question, that I'm sure even those who are somewhat defensive of the subject in general, have asked of other's sometime within their martial arts careers. Point of contention here; we are only following the paths that have been formulated for us. All these ranks and titles were invented and presented to us. We were told to respect and honor the ways of obtaining these ranks, for it was supposed to be obtained thru hard work, dedication and so on and so forth. We are expected to adhear to these directives, but those that implemented them are/were excused from this path? 

I have all the respect in the world for guys like Whalen, Mike T., Holcomb, Booth, West and Rudy. Why, because they followed the dictated path from white belt to whatever Dan ranking they now hold. What's even more important, is that they have the documentation that accompanies that path. There's no voids between the ranks. If they can and were expected to do it that way, then I don't see why those that were before them shouldn't have done it the same way. As I said, they introduced this protocal in the first place. 

Not to sound contradictory, but I'm sure Mr. Seo has documentation listing his education and growth in the arts. Perhaps I don't understand the interface between Hapkido and Kuk Sool Won, but all this information was extracted from a public access bio page and it presented something questionable to those of us that are not that educated in the diplomatic aspects of Korean martial arts.


----------



## Master Todd Miller (Nov 14, 2004)

GM Ji's sill has always been beyond question.

I would argue that point in that GM Ji's skill is not the highest level Hapkido!  GM Kim was a 5th dan under Ji and could not move a high school student from DJN Choi's dojang!  It seems that GM Ji's technique is very good but not complete according to Choi, Yong Sul.  This is not to say Ji's technique is not good but just not complete.  He did add a number of kicks but kicks has never been the trademark of real hapkido.

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## greendragon (Nov 14, 2004)

One way to find out about GM Ji's technique...go train with him?  It's that simple.  Then you will know for yourself and won't have to gossip all the time like a bunch of little hens running around the barnyard....
                                    Michael Tomlinson


----------



## Master Todd Miller (Nov 15, 2004)

One way to find out about GM Ji's technique...go train with him? It's that simple.

Mike,

I am personally not all that interested in Sin Moo.  I practice and teach Hapkido as taught by Choi, Yong Sul and GM Lim and from ALL that I have herd from they are very different due the focus points.  This is NOT saying anything bad about GM Ji's technique or abilities!  

There are many branches on the Hapkido tree and Ji is definatly one of those brances.  My point is that Doju Nim Choi is the root or trunk of the tree and deserves that respect!

As for training ALL are welcome to my dojang Saturday November 20th for our Hapkido/ Guhapdo Freindship workout.  It does not matter what branch of Hapkido you are from!  It is all about the training. artyon: 

Take care

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## American HKD (Nov 15, 2004)

Disco said:
			
		

> I know this is going to p**s off some people, but the door has been pushed open. From my viewpoint, I tend to see a big double standard here. If an American 3rd Dan up and started his own organization, he would be roasted, toasted and unboasted until somebody closed the thread. It would also be highly doubtful that his technical expertise would be part of the discussion. It's no secret that I don't have any warm and fuzzy's for the way Korean's in general, conduct business within the martial arts world they control. I've seen way to much stuff happen to ever be objective again. This thread was started with a valid question, that I'm sure even those who are somewhat defensive of the subject in general, have asked of other's sometime within their martial arts careers. Point of contention here; we are only following the paths that have been formulated for us. All these ranks and titles were invented and presented to us. We were told to respect and honor the ways of obtaining these ranks, for it was supposed to be obtained thru hard work, dedication and so on and so forth. We are expected to adhear to these directives, but those that implemented them are/were excused from this path?
> 
> I have all the respect in the world for guys like Whalen, Mike T., Holcomb, Booth, West and Rudy. Why, because they followed the dictated path from white belt to whatever Dan ranking they now hold. What's even more important, is that they have the documentation that accompanies that path. There's no voids between the ranks. If they can and were expected to do it that way, then I don't see why those that were before them shouldn't have done it the same way. As I said, they introduced this protocal in the first place.
> 
> Not to sound contradictory, but I'm sure Mr. Seo has documentation listing his education and growth in the arts. Perhaps I don't understand the interface between Hapkido and Kuk Sool Won, but all this information was extracted from a public access bio page and it presented something questionable to those of us that are not that educated in the diplomatic aspects of Korean martial arts.


Bruce,

All the founders of Modern Korean Arts today and for that matter many electic system of today were in fact low ranking MA from elsewhere and never went up the ladder as you say guys like Whalen, Mike T., Holcomb, Booth, West and Rudy did.

So when I metioned to you to leave that other guy alone (Royal hapkido something) you can now see why I have that position.

Bruce Lee was not any high ranking student of Yip Man, nor was Joo bang Lee, General Choi, Ji Han Jae, Ed Parker, Henry Okasaki (Danzan Ryu 3rd Dan Kodokan Judo). Brazilian Jujutsu ( what Dan was he when he founded the BBJ? now he's a 9th dan ) 

Look in any issue of Black Belt Mag and see how many self made new systems there are. 

How many will stick in 20 years?


----------



## greendragon (Nov 15, 2004)

Todd writes:
I am personally not all that interested in Sin Moo. I practice and teach Hapkido as taught by Choi, Yong Sul and GM Lim and from ALL that I have herd from they are very different due the focus points.::

And therein lies your problem.. you are more interested in stating what you have "heard" instead of going and seeing for yourself...  I see you practice what Choi teaches..yada yada yada... did they also teach you to get on the internet and talk trash about Ji and other Korean GM's without ever meeting him?  Or is that your own unique invention?  Too much gossip and patting yourself on the back because somehow you think you are "special" in some way because you do some "special" Hapkido,, maybe all this talk is just a defense mechanism that your mind has created to bolster yourself up to feel more adequate.  Psychology of Personality  101...Wake up and quit gossiping over and over...
                                                              Michael Tomlinson


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 15, 2004)

First, I think we need a moratorium on the use of that "go train with him" arguement". In the end it would still be subjective. In my own case I DID go train with Ji. I wasn't impressed. The result was that people THEN said, "oh, well you didn't train with him enough. If you trained with him more, well, THEN you would see his greatness." In the case of Suh, I understand that though he was in Chicago a couple of years back, essentially he did a demo of techniques and then the actually teaching itself was conducted by cadre that he brought with him. I don't think this would actually qualify as having "trained with" him as I would define it. 

Secondly, I get really tired of folks constantly coming on these Nets and repeatedly talking about how what THEY do is different. Maybe someone would like to tell me what peoples' vested interest is in making sure that what they do is seem as clearly delineated from everyone else. Its not like what Ji does is so all-fired different from Seo or Lee or Kimm. When I was talking about hapkiyusool I worked very hard to show how I viewed it progressing from and relating to the overall Hapkido community. I would bet money that others would much rather see hapkiyusool as some kind of art completely and distinctly different from Hapkido. Whats the payoff in this? What is it that drives people to keep dividing the Hapkido community into disparate groups. Is that what you want--- a community driven by turf wars? Has this done anything for us in the past 50 years?!? 

Lastly, I, too, am hearing mixed messages. On one hand you want the structure of the rank system as it interfaces with a corporate approach to MA organization. Everyone wants tight accountability and regulation----- as long as it applies to OTHER people and THEIR organization. I don't hear anyone calling their OWN rank or standing into question or volunteering to submit to another persons' structure. I don't hear anyone reviewing their own rank and volunteering to give up some standing because it does not meet the criteria of another organization. A guy could be forgiven for thinking that folks are just talking to hear themselves talk, yes? FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 15, 2004)

Dear Stuart: 

".......Bruce Lee was not any high ranking student of Yip Man, nor was Joo bang Lee, General Choi, Ji Han Jae, Ed Parker, Henry Okasaki (Danzan Ryu 3rd Dan Kodokan Judo). Brazilian Jujutsu ( what Dan was he when he founded the BBJ? now he's a 9th dan ) 

Look in any issue of Black Belt Mag and see how many self made new systems there are......." 

I honestly believe that you are mixing apples and oranges here and I have witness you using this approach on a number of occasions. It does not fit the circumstances that you are talking about. Please advise me which way you want things. 

Do you want to be bound by a ranking system? Thats OK with me. It is NOT a Korean tradition but if thats what you want I can understand it. Just know that it will need to "start" somewhere. But even more so there will be criteria, responsibilities, standards and so forth for each rank. Thats the point of HAVING a ranking system. Please see Kano's writing to explain this in more detail. 

Do you want to be free of a ranking system? Thats OK with me. This closer to Korean tradition and I tend to support this in keeping with the kwan approach. In the sword class I attend we wear NO rank. A persons' standing is disclosed by his skill. Without the rank, however, you lose bragging rights, and the clear distinction most Americans hunger-for in knowing where they stand compared to the person next to them. Don't want rank? Fine. Take YOUR belt off and burn YOUR certificates. Actions speak louder than words. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD (Nov 15, 2004)

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Stuart:
> 
> ".......Bruce Lee was not any high ranking student of Yip Man, nor was Joo bang Lee, General Choi, Ji Han Jae, Ed Parker, Henry Okasaki (Danzan Ryu 3rd Dan Kodokan Judo). Brazilian Jujutsu ( what Dan was he when he founded the BBJ? now he's a 9th dan )
> 
> ...


I don't have an issue with the ranking system that's not even what I was talking about.

I was commenting on your comment that said

.........I know this is going to p**s off some people, but the door has been pushed open. From my viewpoint, I tend to see a big double standard here. If an American 3rd Dan up and started his own organization, he would be roasted, toasted and unboasted until somebody closed the thread. It would also be highly doubtful that his technical expertise would be part of the discussion. It's no secret that I don't have any warm and fuzzy's for the way Korean's in general, conduct business within the martial arts world they control. I've seen way to much stuff happen to ever be objective again. This thread was started with a valid question, that I'm sure even those who are somewhat defensive of the subject in general, have asked of other's sometime within their martial arts careers. Point of contention here; we are only following the paths that have been formulated for us. All these ranks and titles were invented and presented to us. We were told to respect and honor the ways of obtaining these ranks, for it was supposed to be obtained thru hard work, dedication and so on and so forth. We are expected to adhear to these directives, but those that implemented them are/were excused from this path? 

I have all the respect in the world for guys like Whalen, Mike T., Holcomb, Booth, West and Rudy. Why, because they followed the dictated path from white belt to whatever Dan ranking they now hold. What's even more important, is that they have the documentation that accompanies that path. There's no voids between the ranks. If they can and were expected to do it that way, then I don't see why those that were before them shouldn't have done it the same way. As I said, they introduced this protocal in the first place. 

Not to sound contradictory, but I'm sure Mr. Seo has documentation listing his education and growth in the arts. Perhaps I don't understand the interface between Hapkido and Kuk Sool Won, but all this information was extracted from a public access bio page and it presented something questionable to those of us that are not that educated in the diplomatic aspects of Korean martial arts..........


----------



## greendragon (Nov 15, 2004)

You guys are truly legends in your own minds... Bruce went to training for one day with Ji and formed an opinion,never mind he couldn't make the second day of training, aka... quit... Korea one week and inherited the secret curriculum... Todd... same ole same ole, my Hapkido is better than your Hapkido, sorry but I'm done with all the talk.... please unsubscribe me from this site.... I would rather train than listen to you experts..goodnight folks...
                                                             Michael Tomlinson


----------



## American HKD (Nov 15, 2004)

*THE STORY OF MARTIAL ARTS RANK "STANDARDS"*​
​
We hear a constant barrage of comments about rank standards, especially among inexperienced Martial Artists. By inexperienced I mean people who have less than 20 years hard training. have never produced a champion as a coach and often have never been in a fight in their lives. These people insist that we must have "standards." Of course each one means something different by standards. Let's take a look at some facts about standards.

First, there are those who say that only competition (winning in tournaments) should count for promotions, that is their "standard." That's OK for the first 20 years or so, if you wish. but what about the teacher whose knees are shot but who still goes down to the YMCA every week, year after year to teach kids? He's too old and injured to compete. Is his promotion career in Martial Arts ended forever? *Well, no, say these people-in this case we'll make an exception. *By the way, how many of our high ranks in any Martial Art actually got their high ranks from competition? Find me one, please, and I'll show you the exception.

Let's take technical knowledge. Some shout from the roof tops that every person must have deep technical knowledge and pass an actual exam on the mat before a promotion can be made. But what about our international Judo champions who can't do the Nage No Kata of Judo or pass even a first degree black belt test? Are their promotions ended? *Well, no, say these people--in this case we'll make an exception. *By the way, how many of the people sitting on the promotion boards testing the others have themselves taken a test? Find me one, please.

And then there are those who say that there must be a certain time in grade between each rank. This is their "standard." But what about Nakabayashi Sensei, who won "batsugun" (instantaneous promotion) to 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Dan in Judo, just one year apart for each rank, by beating a whole line of equal ranks? Should we take his ranks away? *Well, no, say these people--in this case we'll make an exception.*

And so it goes. For each standard, there must be exceptions, and in truth the whole promotion area is, and should be, full of exceptions.

In Japan in 1963, a leader gave two million dollars to the Kodokan and was immediately made 8th Degree. That rank (Hachidan-8th Degree) is called, "Important person of Judo," and believe me, anyone who gives millions is certainly important, so that rank is very valid. *Excuse me for saying it, but that is another exception!*

We of the USMA believe that time in service to the Martial Arts is the key to promotion. In the beginning, students have nothing to give but their hard work, and they should be judged on that. Of course technical knowledge is important, of course competition is important, of course coaching and writing are important. But these are all types of service, and so is long effort over many years. In the end, no one fools everyone very long. We always say, "Everybody knows who can dance." It is basically the club instructor who makes the promotion decisions in his or her club, and the USMA gives him that prerogative. For instructors who have no teacher to rely on for promotions, we of the USMA have myself as O-Sensei, because I have been directed by our Board to take charge of teaching and promoting teachers.

Not a week goes by without my hearing from some old trooper in the Martial Arts who has been neglected for promotion. Martial Arts organizations are famous for neglecting their members for promotion. I find 30 year veterans of competition and teaching who are still first and second degree black belts! It is my pleasure to study their records and often immediately promote them to 4th or 5th degree, often backdating their ranks so that we can promote them again soon. We even find leaders who started in Judo or Aikido, got no rank in those arts, then became high degrees in other arts and have no rank at all in arts they have studied for 30 or 40 years. We are proud of the fact that we correct these injustices. In fact, that is one of the major reasons we started the USMA.

I know these ideas cause some people to have fits. That's just the way it has to be. We are going to do what we believe is right, even if some inexperienced or narrow-minded person doesn't like it.

We have very high standards in the USMA because we dare to reward service and devotion to the Martial Arts. This policy is very traditional, very much in keeping with the long history of the Martial Arts. We are proud of the ranks we award, and so are the ones who receive them. There is no need to defend them, just look at the composition of our International Board of Martial Arts Masters on our beautiful website: www.mararts.org. These are the people who stand behind the ranks of their systems and the ranks of the USMA. We are proud of them.

Or come to our yearly National Training Camp held during our Hall of Fame week. There you will find great teachers teaching many Martial Arts, and everyone studies all the arts in friendship and eagerness to learn. Solid national training is an important part of our USMA rank system.

Above all we know that the purpose of the Martial Arts is the development and eventual perfection of human character. If we constantly strive for that, we can't go wrong. And for the great men and women of the USMA who daily give their best to teach students the ways of better character, we can do no less than reward them with the ranks they deserve.

You are always in my heart.
O-Sensei Philip Porter
http://www.mararts.org/articles/articles.shtml


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 15, 2004)

"......You guys are truly legends in your own minds... Bruce went to training for one day with Ji and formed an opinion,never mind he couldn't make the second day of training, aka... quit... Korea one week and inherited the secret curriculum... Todd... same ole same ole, my Hapkido is better than your Hapkido, sorry but I'm done with all the talk.... please unsubscribe me from this site.... I would rather train than listen to you experts..goodnight folks..." 

And when people don't have anything positive to add they dredge-up something to hit a button or two and then cut and run. If Mike wanted to be unsubscribed, why dump in a quick stick and THEN take off. And I could have bet money that he would have pulled up that old chestnut about not staying the whole weekend at the Ji Fantasy Tour in Colo. I can call it that because while I made it there, for Michael it will always be just one more event he can ONLY talk about as he never made it there.  And by the way..........

Now Do you *idiots* see what is going on here !!!!!!!!!!!

This exact same exchange took place on DOCHANG DIGEST scant monthes back. It didn't make things better then and its not making things better now. If I go on then Michael will be compelled to respond and then I'll be nit-picking back. Is THIS what you want from Hapkido? Michael makes one comment in how many posts and its a derisive one? Now lets up date things a bit. 

1.) Could Michael have made a positive contribution to the minimal standards thread? 

2.) Could Michael have provided a rationale for not meeting with me when I was down in Florida this year? 

3.) Could Michael suggested a resource for a commonly accepted nomenclature for Hapkido techniques? 

Sure, he could have done a lot of positive things, but the fact is that what he DID do was come on the Net, disparage a couple of people and cut and run. Is this the Hapkido community you folks want? 

And how come you aren't being more honest about rank, Stuart? You want the structure that comes with rank but if that structure does not support your standing then you want an easement. You want a 5th dan but you don't want to have to abide by a structure that would underwrite the integrity of that rank. Whats up about that? 

And how about that comment about being "defensive"? Are you going to give any explanation of where you were going with that? 

And what on earth was that essay you cut&paste-d. Was there some point in all of that? 

A guy could be forgiven for concluding that all that is of interest to folks here is the desire to get off on seeing your opinions published cheap on a world stage. This string started off with the statement "Where do they get rank?" 

Has anything been resolved? 

Has anything been clarified? 

Has anything been answered? 

OK. So current masters gave themselves rank. OK. Now what. Does that mean that we all are free to give ourselves rank? Does this mean that rank is inherently worthless? You folks are posting things but you are not saying anything. Whats up about that? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Master Todd Miller (Nov 15, 2004)

And therein lies your problem.. you are more interested in stating what you have "heard" instead of going and seeing for yourself... I see you practice what Choi teaches..yada yada yada... did they also teach you to get on the internet and talk trash about Ji and other Korean GM's without ever meeting him? Or is that your own unique invention? Too much gossip and patting yourself on the back because somehow you think you are "special" in some way because you do some "special" Hapkido,, maybe all this talk is just a defense mechanism that your mind has created to bolster yourself up to feel more adequate. Psychology of Personality 101...Wake up and quit gossiping over and over...
Michael Tomlinson 

Mike,

Your just making up stories that are not there!  I have only stated what I see.  You always seem to make it out that it is me against Ji and that is not true!  Since when have I patted myself on the back?  I have seen Ji's student and was not impressed at all.  Why would I want to go train with Ji?  His reputation for selling rank or is it his unique personality?  After reading the things you write Mike I would have no desire to see Ji.  Why do you get so bent out of shape when we are having a cival conversation?  Do you have somthing to hide?  Are you trying to build Ji and yourself up despite the bad reputation Ji has for selling rank?

Right back at Ya Mike :2xBird2: 

You are always welcome to train at my dojang along with anyone that is willing to just train and I will not even try to hurt you to make some stupid point!

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 15, 2004)

Dear Todd: 


".......You always seem to make it out that it is me against Ji and that is not true! Since when have I patted myself on the back? I have seen Ji's student and was not impressed at all. Why would I want to go train with Ji? His reputation for selling rank or is it his unique personality? After reading the things you write Mike I would have no desire to see Ji. Why do you get so bent out of shape when we are having a cival conversation?...." 

I am beginning to think that there is something much more insidious going on here, but it will take a bit to explain. 

Sometimes, when I counsel, there is a model called "transactional analysis" that lends organization to my approach. In that model people are scripted to behave in a particular way by getting bits of information from each of the parents. In this way it is easy to identify a lot of toxic behaviors in the children by looking to the parents to see where these influences might have come from. Its not a guarenteed answer, just another indicator to help out. 
I mention this because Mikes' response appeared to me to be so knee-jerk and boiler-plate that I am left to wonder if he is not just living out what he has come to understand to be "normal" in the Hapkido world according to Ji. 

Now remember, we are hearing a lot of warm, fuzzy things about Ji lately, but he has a nasty history going back to the beginning just like so many of the big names in the Hapkido arts. After years of conducting himself out of a defensive position where he is represented as the sole source of truth in an otherwise world of liars and phonies is it any wonder that his disciples would represent the world the same way? Does it make sense? No. Is it good for Hapkido? No. Is it easy, requiring little thought or energy? Absolutely! 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox (Nov 15, 2004)

Hello all,

Look, I started this thread because I was curious how Seo, In Sun who I believe claims a 10th Dan got his rank.  If it is from his brother, in the martial art he (Suh, In Hyuk) made up, that is fine.  That still does not answer how, when the Kuk Sool Won people have spent 20 + years telling all of us that Kuk Sool Won was not Hapkido, that Seo, In Sun now chairs a Hapkido organization.

Now, with all due respect Rudy, why do I need to train with him to question this rank?  He may be an expert technician, a nice guy, good father, blah, blah, but does he have Hapkido rank above third dan that would qualify him to call himself a 10th Dan (if its only 9th, forgive me - but since he awards 9th dans, I figured it must be a 10th dan) - and if he does have this rank can anyone identify its origin.  If it is self-created, or from Kuk Sool Won, great, but what is it?  If it is from Kuk Sool Won, how can he run a Hapkido organization when Kuk Sool Won and Hapkido in their words are NOT the same art?

Sorry Ji was brought into the mix here, I didn't intend that.  But, Mr. Tomlinson, grow up, once again you inject only name calling when you post - if discussion is just too much for you, fine, but we are all being civil here.  If you feel you must go away, BYE!

What is it though with the "come and train with them" thing?  What if someone came for a day to train with me and I was under the weather, tired, whatever?  Would that 1 day be an accurate assessment of me as a teacher?  What if I was having the best day of a mediocre teaching life? Same thing.  Rank is SUPPOSED to ensure that these types of questions are not neccessary.  When I meet a student of so-and-so, and they are known to me at a certain rank, that should carry a certain weight.  When someone claims super-rank, that should be supported, with rank from another, or the knowledge that the rank was self-created - then we all know what we are dealing with.  We here are generally involved in Hapkido - so I will not speak to the others from other arts brought up here - but the conspiracy of  silence from many notable Koreans regarding their super-rank should stop - here.  

If Seo, In Sun's rank is from his brother, then great, we know it is made up by them from Kuk Sool Won, and in my opinion his validity to run a Hapkido organization should be in doubt.  I believe that across the board, many super-ranks have kept a don't ask-don't tell policy about their rank - does it mean that they are not good practioners?  Good teachers?  Wise, kind, generous? No, not at all, but in a martial arts hierarchy, there is rank for a reason - it has traditionally separated levels of knowledge and experience.  If these super ranks are self ranked in their own thing - identify it and we all move on - but to call what they do Hapkido does all of us a disservice.


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 15, 2004)

I guess it comes down to that same thing I keep banging away at. 

If people want to have a ranking system, then they have to accept a ranking system, warts and all and that includes the responsibility for owning where and how the whole chain starts and how it is rationalized. 

If people don't want a ranking system, thats OK too. But with that goes the organizational bennies such as having the revenues all flow a particular direction and for a particular reason. 

So how is this going to be played? Anyone? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD (Nov 15, 2004)

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> I guess it comes down to that same thing I keep banging away at.
> 
> If people want to have a ranking system, then they have to accept a ranking system, warts and all and that includes the responsibility for owning where and how the whole chain starts and how it is rationalized.
> 
> ...


Bruce,

Read the article I posted it seems according to Phil Porter there's always exceptions to the rule that's life there's no way past it.


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 15, 2004)

I read it, but I don't agree with it. To me his reasoning proceeds from the same learned-helplessness and cynacism that causes many Americans not to vote. Of course there are exceptions, but by definition these are rare or extraordinary events. If there is the prevalance the author would like us to believe the deviations from the norm are no longer--- well--- "exceptional". 

Further, it is not our place to breakdown as many standards as possible only because there have been some exceptions or because it is hard to maintain meaningful standards. Part of the responsibility of teaching is to show students how to set standards for themselves, then meet or excced those standards by applying their abilities. Pulling the standards lower, dissipating what standards remain or reducing expectations for the students damages both the students view of themselves as well as the community view of the art. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD (Nov 15, 2004)

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> I read it, but I don't agree with it. To me his reasoning proceeds from the same learned-helplessness and cynacism that causes many Americans not to vote. Of course there are exceptions, but by definition these are rare or extraordinary events. If there is the prevalance the author would like us to believe the deviations from the norm are no longer--- well--- "exceptional".
> 
> Further, it is not our place to breakdown as many standards as possible only because there have been some exceptions or because it is hard to maintain meaningful standards. Part of the responsibility of teaching is to show students how to set standards for themselves, then meet or excced those standards by applying their abilities. Pulling the standards lower, dissipating what standards remain or reducing expectations for the students damages both the students view of themselves as well as the community view of the art. FWIW.
> 
> ...


Ok you have made good points, but there are many major flaws in the ranking system be it self appointment, favoritism, money, egos, power, etc. 

The system needs repairing and some people like Phil Porter who's in a position to right some wrongs has no promblem doing so.

As I said before I support standards just minimum standards not heavy handed ones designed to hold people back and I think were working on it to some small degree right here.


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 15, 2004)

".......Ok you have made good points, but there are many major flaws in the ranking system be it self appointment, favoritism, money, egos, power, etc. 

The system needs repairing and some people like Phil Porter who's in a position to right some wrongs has no promblem doing so.

As I said before I support standards just minimum standards not heavy handed ones designed to hold people back and I think were working on it to some small degree right here..."


Absolutely 100% right!! 

And herein is my big gripe that cuts through all of my posts. I honestly don't care if people want a ranking system or not. I honestly don't care who people want to follow or why. I honestly don't care if people want a minimum standard or set their own standards. I have my belief system and works for me. 

What uniformly gets my undies in a bundle is that people report wanting one thing, making a case for something else,  and then shave points to get yet a third option. I'm left wondering, "What just happened?" Its the classic case of wanting your cake, wanting to eat your cake and wanting to sell it to someone else all at the same time. To my way of thinking training in Hapkido is about building Character and it doesn't take any Character to want the world to be the way I described in the previous  two sentences. Anyone who has played with a 3 y/o knows any child "wants it all" and wants it all THEIR WAY! I guarentee Life does not work this way, nor should it. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## kwanjang (Nov 15, 2004)

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Rudy:
> 
> Perhaps I am missing something, so I share the following with some care. All the same I think there is some part of the message that is being lost here and I, for my part, believe it needs to be said. Please bear with me.
> 
> ...



Hello Bruce:
I agree with you that high rank requires leadership and a whole lot more.  My point is simple.  I looked at what the man had to offer in terms of Hap Ki Do... not at what rank he claims (or actually has).  My whole argument was that the paper trail he can (or cannot) produce would not have mattered one iota to me.  What I saw him do on the mat is what I went for.

BTW, I do not believe I have ever heard GM Seo (not GM Suh, just to make sure we know who we are discussing) say he taught a particular brand of Hap Ki Do.  He DOES have a different umbrella organization now, but that is a different thing altogether.  To me, this only makes him more accessible to people like me.  I do not HAVE to join his "brand" of Hap Ki Do or dance to his tune (like I had to do when I joined WKSA

I enjoy the freedom to continue to teach what I have learned from my original Master, I get constant guidance in technique, and I am not being pressured to constantly "buy" things or sell them to my students (which was a major source of pressure in the other org).  In all, it is very similar to what I do with NKMAA.  No politics, no pressure... what more can I ask for


----------



## kwanjang (Nov 15, 2004)

greendragon said:
			
		

> One way to find out about GM Ji's technique...go train with him?  It's that simple.  Then you will know for yourself and won't have to gossip all the time like a bunch of little hens running around the barnyard....
> Michael Tomlinson



Exactly what I suggested earlier with GM Seo.  Not to be the cause of controversy... just to point out that TRAINING (and realizing who has something to teach you) is where it is at.


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 15, 2004)

Thanks, Rudy. 

It sounds like we are actually on the same page. For my part I have had less and less patience with this whole idea of constantly keeping Hapkido practitioners at each others' throats. Certainly I have an axe to grind with the older generation because I think that there was a whole lot more they could have done to reduce the disparity and antagonism among various groups of practitioners. A bit at a time it seems that folks are easing into those same positions of leadership and instead of addressing these antagonisms and maybe assuaging them, the new leaders are likewise feeding into them. And look at how readily people will point-up differences rather than agree on similarlities. Wouldn't be so bad except these are the same people who preach about coming together based on compromise ("We really need to compromise.... you go first".) Nor does it help when a whole new group starts off and introduces yet another latyer of outrageous claims and conflicts.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## kwanjang (Nov 15, 2004)

Perhaps I should have read ALL of the posts, before I began working the ones I had missed due to our week of training and promotion here.  At first I though we had a great discussion going, but now it seems like it has turned once more in the same old BS that is so detrimental to our arts.  

Why is it that we cannot have a civil discussion????   Kevin had a legitimate question, we had some good debate, I was learning to see it the way some others viewed it (so the entire thread was a good learning experience for me), and suddenly we are at it again.  

Like I said, the "go train" with the man (in either Seo or Ji's case) is not a challenge.  I (at least) was simply suggesting that a "trained eye" should be able to SEE if the person is doing Hap Ki Do or not.  Nothing to do with what an art is called, just a simple way to check the validity of the roots of our art.

Suh (not Seo) has a reason why he claims that Kuk Sool was never called Kuk Sool Hap Ki Do.  I have certificates sent by him from Korea in the 60's that prove otherwise.  On visits to Korea, I found a ton of vehicles parked outside the Olympic stadium (where we had a Hap Ki Do competition) that bore the name Kuk Sool Hap Ki Do.  Yet, in an interview with Tedeschi,  Suh claims it wa NEVER called that.  We know different.

As founder/president of NKMAA, I get a lot of inquiries and applications.  Many are rejected because I do not recognize the sources from which they originated (and that includes any Hap Ki Do certificates from GM Porter).  I know he is/was an excellent Judoka, but IMHO he is not qualified to grant rank in our art.  Hence, I follow my own belief and reject these aps at a considerable economical cost to our association.  

Similarly, I have rejected an application from a group that was shortly after accepted by one of our peers.  IMHO, the applicant showed good Jiu Jitsu technique, but I could not and would not transfer that into a Hap Ki Do certificate... again at a considerable economic cost to NKMAA.  This particular rejection was simply because I SAW that the technique in the video set was not Hap Ki Do.  Same reason I suggested folks take a look at GM Seo's technique.  If, after watching, you still feel he does not do Hap Ki Do you no longer need to wonder about his background... you simply KNOW for yourself what you must believe.  

I could care less that someone else accepted the very same people I rejected.  They did what they had to do, and I followed MY heart.   IMHO, who is right and who is wrong makes no difference to most others in the arts.  I am not the all knowing, I simply know what I want in NKMAA  I walk my talk right or wrong, and I know I make mistakes.  I just do my best to learn from them, and I will not demean anyone who trains differently than I do just because it is different.  Hopefully that is a step toward brotherhood in the martial arts, 'cause I surely hate to see us continue to bicker.

If it turns out that Kevin does not believe GM Seo does Hap Ki Do, that is not a problem for me.  I will continue to respect him for the person I understand him to be (from reading his posts).  IMHO, raising a point should never be considered a threat, and talking trash is not an option for folks who love martial arts.  The reason I no longer follow GM Suh (WKSA) is because I do not like his business practices and ethics; however, I will always respect his skills as a martial artist, and his son Suh Sung Jin is about the most skilled practitioner I have ever seen (oh to be young again.  Oddly enough, his formative years in the arts were under the tutelage of his Unlce GM Seo.


----------



## American HKD (Nov 15, 2004)

kwanjang said:
			
		

> Perhaps I should have read ALL of the posts, before I began working the ones I had missed due to our week of training and promotion here. At first I though we had a great discussion going, but now it seems like it has turned once more in the same old BS that is so detrimental to our arts.
> 
> Why is it that we cannot have a civil discussion???? Kevin had a legitimate question, we had some good debate, I was learning to see it the way some others viewed it (so the entire thread was a good learning experience for me), and suddenly we are at it again.
> 
> ...


Dear Rudy,

I agree with you in the case of Sensei Porter giving someone rank in an art he's not qualified to give.

I posted that article to show that sometimes there's a need for variations and deviations of standards for the right reasons.


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 15, 2004)

I have been over this string a few times and the best that I can point out is not what is said but what is NOT said and is communicated (or interpretted) by implication. The original question cannot be answered without indicting the person identified. We ALL know what the implications of this string are about. This is not the first time we have been over this ground. Rank and standing have been the 500# gorrilla that visits every one of these discussions. The pattern is always the same. 

a. Someone is singled out and his vitae is called into question. 

b. People take sides. 

c. Then the fight is on to see who is "more authentic", "more genuine" or "more legitimate" than others.

d. It always comes back to the some subjective crap based on how something is defined, or what is included by one person that is left out by another. 

This is the fourth string in a row that I have pointed out that we in the Hapkido community are better served by amplifying and stressing our similarities than pointing up how we are different, but its falling on deaf ears, and I see no reason to think it will be any different this time. People seem to like pointing up that they are special and that they are different and because of that difference they are somehow special. I would go so far as to say that is where I get most of my "nasti-grams". People figure that I am putting myself in some rarified area above everyone else. Is anyone else here familiar with the concept of "projection"? 

I'll hazard yet another guess to say that folks here seem to like the conflict since it gives them novelty they would not otherwise have. Instead of ending conflict as the art supposes these Hapkido practitioners "accidently" feed it for all their worth. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Paul B (Nov 15, 2004)

> the Hapkido community are better served by amplifying and stressing our similarities than pointing up how we are different


I could not agree more,Bruce!

And as an aside....would it really change anything if we had rock solid evidence that Choi never trained with Takeda,or Myung was only a 2nd Dan in actuality,or Ji learned from a drunken goat and ..........

I am not one for calling in credibility attacks or defending them for that matter....what YOU can DO on and off the mat....that speaks volumes to me.


----------



## kwanjang (Nov 15, 2004)

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> ... The original question cannot be answered without indicting the person identified. We ALL know what the implications of this string are about. This is not the first time we have been over this ground. Rank and standing have been the 500# gorrilla that visits every one of these discussions. The pattern is always the same.
> 
> a. Someone is singled out and his vitae is called into question.
> 
> ...



Hello Bruce.  I don't think folks in the beginning of this thread were casting stones... at least I did not take it that way.  I surely did not come to the defense of GM Seo, as I am sure he does not need my help there.  I just suggested that one take a look to see what he can do.  I would say the same about GM Ji or anyone else.  Have doubts about someone's rank in a particular art, go look see.  I personally never worry about what others call the art I teach, because I simply continue on what I have been taught regardless of what others think.  Heck, it is all I know, and after fifty some years it is not possible for me to do anything else lol.

If folks like JR, after looking me over on the mat at a Wisconsin seminar (I went to in order to learn from him), thinks I am a "Player" then so much better for me.  Had he said I was a fraud, my teaching would not have changed one iota to please him.  I am who I am because of the lessons I learned, and nothing can change that.  GM Suh felt I needed to go down two ranks, and that never bothered me.  I simply went down two ranks in order to learn what he had to teach.  If we did not worry so much about rank, perhaps we could focus more on training.  I have always carried my white belt with me, and I still do because I have lots more to learn.

BTW, that is the main reason I have not chimed in on the "standardization" efforts you folks are working on.  I am not sure I have anything worth while to contribute, and  I am still looking over what is being said there before opening my mouth and inserting my size 12.

I feel that much of the problems stem from not being clear what is being said in our posts on forums, and people take offense before realizing no one is being offended.  I see many times where (after some discussions that look like they are turning into battles) suddenly the intent of our message become clearer, and we realize that essentially we ARE at par with our thinking.  Forums like this are great, but they do have some draw backs.


----------



## Master Todd Miller (Nov 16, 2004)

I think some people get mixed up on what I have said about Ji!  I am sure Ji has a great amount of skill in what he does.  My interest has always been DJN Choi's style of Hapkido not Ji's.  My reasoning is simple, Ji did not spend much time with Choi.  If I wanted to learn Choi's complete art would I go to 3 year student or try to find a Master that had trained longer?  When I think of Hapkido I break it down into 2 major branches, Original - Choi and 
Sin Moo - Ji.  My training is very focused on Choi's style of Hapkido so if I am going to take funds away from my trips to Korea I have to be very selective.  This is just my training shcedule and I am very happy with it as I have learned a great deal from my teacher and have much more to learn.

I am always open to getting on the matt with other practitioners wheather they be Hapkido, Kuk Sool or any other art.  I know that when we get together for training and leve egos at the door we often develope freindships.  This is always been my goal and will continually be very important to me.

Thoughts

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## American HKD (Nov 16, 2004)

Master Todd Miller said:
			
		

> I think some people get mixed up on what I have said about Ji! I am sure Ji has a great amount of skill in what he does. My interest has always been DJN Choi's style of Hapkido not Ji's. My reasoning is simple, Ji did not spend much time with Choi. If I wanted to learn Choi's complete art would I go to 3 year student or try to find a Master that had trained longer? When I think of Hapkido I break it down into 2 major branches, Original - Choi and
> Sin Moo - Ji. My training is very focused on Choi's style of Hapkido so if I am going to take funds away from my trips to Korea I have to be very selective. This is just my training shcedule and I am very happy with it as I have learned a great deal from my teacher and have much more to learn.
> 
> I am always open to getting on the matt with other practitioners wheather they be Hapkido, Kuk Sool or any other art. I know that when we get together for training and leve egos at the door we often develope freindships. This is always been my goal and will continually be very important to me.
> ...


Dear Todd,

What I hear you saying is I have no problem with Ji then throw in he only learned for 3 years which seems like a backhanded dig. I can deal with it.

Let me make a suggestion. 

Get a hold of some DVDs of Ji students or student of students like Chong Soo Lee it's Hapkido demo & instructional at it's best. Turtle press produced it.

I doubt you'll have much to say about the quality of Ji's Art or what he learned or didn't learn in 3 years which I believe is really 7 years plus.

BTW the only difference between Sin Moo and what Ji taught back in Korea is on the philosophical side not technical. 

Your thoughts would be welcome after that.


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 16, 2004)

Dear Rudy: 

Thinking about what you wrote, I wonder if we are banging up against a certain limit with this sort of communication venue. For instance, following your post I likewise read Todds' and then Stuarts. The first time through Todds' post I didn't see a "dig" such as Stuart mentioned. Then, I went back looking for the "dig" and could then readily see it when I re-read Todds' post with a different critical eye. I can't say that Todd did, or did not mean a dig. I only know that when I went through his post objectively I didn't see a dig and when I went through the same post more critically, I did. 

I think the same thing holds true for my position on Ji as a teacher. I hold that I was not that impressed with his teaching ability. I still hold this. I found him poorly organized and that his teaching method was superficial and inadequate for the subject he was teaching and the students he was presenting to. I have long since been personally attacked, and chided for critiquing one of the premier personages in Hapkido. No such thing is taking place, but like my experience just now with Todds' post I think people are going to see and hear what they are looking for. In my own heart I know that I was as objective with Jis' teachig skills as I have been at least a hundred times with staff members and student teachers. I can also tell you that Ji is not the first time that I have run into a person who is extraordinarily knowledgeable about his subject but inadequate in teaching that material to others. I have also found people who were excellent teachers but had a very poor grasp of their subject. It happens. What I am considering is that people in the Hapkido community have been contencious for so long that they have lost their objectivity about the subject. I suspect that this has gone so far that even the briefest comment that even "smells" of criticism is met with an overwhelming abreaction. (Witness: Tomlinsons' earlier behavior). We have a great venue here to communicate, but I wonder if folks are really up to this,  Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 16, 2004)

Dear Stuart: 

".......Get a hold of some DVDs of Ji students or student of students like Chong Soo Lee it's Hapkido demo & instructional at it's best. Turtle press produced it.

I doubt you'll have much to say about the quality of Ji's Art or what he learned or didn't learn in 3 years which I believe is really 7 years plus.

BTW the only difference between Sin Moo and what Ji taught back in Korea is on the philosophical side not technical. 

Your thoughts would be welcome after that......" 

OK. And given what you said, after viewing Ji or his student (s) on the floor or in a DVD, what if I am still not impressed? What if I simply have viewed Ji doing his material and found him "less". My own teacher was one of Ji's students and does an extraordinary job teaching. Essentially the same material but taught with a better method. I guess I am not understanding why you are unable or unwilling to discuss the relative skills and material of one personality with another without getting so protective. Is it possibly that you simply cannot explain objectively how Ji is "better". Maybe part of the problem is your own need for one thing to be "better" than another, yes? Can it possibly be that there are simply not that many opportunities to connect with momentous individuals in your life so that when you finally do meet such a person you are overwhelmed by their reputation? Just some odd thoughts, FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## MDFJ (Nov 16, 2004)

I think there has been some good discussion here amongst people getting a little upset and defensive...   :jedi1:      

I personally try to remember that saying: "you cant please all of the people all of the time..."   As Instructors we all have our own teaching material and teaching technique, our own beliefs etc..  I know that not every Student will like my approach to teaching, but I also know many do.  

If Bruce did not like Ji's teaching method that's Bruce's opinion and he is entitled to it as we are all entitled to ours.

In many places (NOT just here) I have witnessed many Intollerance of other styles, beliefs, opinions, kwans, approaches etc etc surrounding the same martial art and other martial art styles...

To me this level of "Im right, your wrong"  Intollerance can border on descrimination which if it were on any other subject such as religion or race would cause World Wars 3,4,5 & 6   

The question of "removing" people whom AN individual or any Group of individuals do not agree with, Policing what is Right and what is Wrong...
If the same were done with someones religous beliefs or their race it would be called Ethnic Cleansing.

Politics... 
Proving someone else wrong does not automatically make you right.

I do not believe this is the Martial Art way.

I am not pointing any fingers, there are many great people on here and I am not anyone special who should be listened to, I have no intention of telling people how it should be...  I just want to ask that people see where I come from with complete respect for everyones difference and individuality, wouldnt the forum and indeed the world be a slightly better place if a few more people had a little more tollerance.? 

Back on subject a bit...

Surely anyone who creates a style will have an almost "illegitimate" rank history compared to their students..   My situation is no different, I decided to develop my own style and as such there is no one who can ever actually give me "legitimate" rank in that style, except me. 

So in theory, my own students ranks are more "legitimate" than mine, they have learnt the style from it's founder and been assessed and awarded grade by it's founder, their own students will in turn have authentic Lineage.

so ANY founder of ANY style..   gave out authentic Rank, and people who learnt either directly from them or with direct lineage to them feel they have "legitimate" lineage, rank and position.   

But who gave the founder their rank...?

I know some hold high ranks in other similar styles, some do not...   

MY own opinion and indeed intention for my own rank progression is simply to continue to study, I may continue to advance through Dan grades in other similar styles, but not that this will hold relevance to the grade I hold in my own style.  I will continue to progress at a pace of progression that I would expect one of my own students to follow if/when they reach the same grade..  I was offered 5th Dan last year, and refused it as I thought it was just a little too early.  If my students and peers offer me that recognition again in the future I am sure I would graciously accept it with the view that it is awarded for contribution as many high Dan grades are.   

Some people in my position have jumped from the 2nd / 3rd Dan they held in one style to the 10th Dan they held in their own style...   They decided to go that way...  If people think they are being a little egotistical then OK, but just because someone claimed a high rank for themselves, does this make them a poor Practitioner or Instructor?

Some people Inflate their Ego in other ways, they win ONE organisations Competition and claim to be a National or World Champion..?!?

When we do demonstrations, do we not try to look as good as we can..?  some people might call this "showing-off"  ?


But is it all Ego?  In many places including USA there are many commercial schools all trying to sell their product..  So perhaps some of these people are just trying to boost their product image...  
Be fair, many products are a little over-zealous in their claims.. "Whiter than white-whites"  "unblocks the sink in a flash"     

Sounds great on the advert, but when people get it home they realise it doesnt perform so well.  

Hopefully anyone who buys a Martial Arts "product" will recognise *IF * they have a sub-standard product.


Just MY thoughts, FWIW
 

Marc


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 16, 2004)

Dear Marc: 

Too many good thoughts to comment on them all. Nice job. 

For myself, I often hear some vague need for validation, or corroboration but it is SO vague that it is almost impossible to describe it. In many posts I hear that people want to be recognized for their place in the Hapkido community, and for what they have contributed. Many times I hear the intolerance that I think you are speaking of because what ONE person thinks is valuable, and is the foundation of their standing in the community, is not valued by others. This is sad, and difficult, because most of us conclude that we are all in the same community, share many of the same characteristics and techniques so it would seem to follow that we share the same values, opinions and beliefs. When this turns out not to be the case, the knee-jerk reaction seems to be that if one,or a couple,of these beliefs aren't shared, than NOTHING is shared and it remains only to say that "I am right and you are wrong". How does this fit with your idea of intolerance or discrimination? Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD (Nov 16, 2004)

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Stuart:
> 
> ".......Get a hold of some DVDs of Ji students or student of students like Chong Soo Lee it's Hapkido demo & instructional at it's best. Turtle press produced it.
> 
> ...


Bruce,

I'm not saying Ji is better or worse than anybody else, but what I am saying is the skills he's passing on are 1st class skills and the foundation of almost every Hapkdoist out there like it or not.

Some of his students are not so good, some are good and some very good and some very very good, but that's not unique to Ji's SinMoo all teachers and organizations have balck belts with varying abilities.

As far as his teaching style goes in my opinion it's not geared for beginers or for one timers. He teaches in a seminar type fashion with a lot of material put out quickly if you don't have a good foundation or can't ask the right questions when you need to alot will pass you by. IMO to learn from Ji you have to attend many, many, many seminars over time until you get it the whole picture.

I have known Ji Han Jae for over twenty years and have spent days with him as his chauffer when I was a 1st Dan in 1983, however I only been training with him for going on a year now. Through his teachings I feel my Hapkido is has really grown and it's a great honor for me to learn under him regardless of what people say about him or how he runs his affairs FWIW.


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 16, 2004)

Dear Stuart: 

OK, then the question actually comes down to a very simple one, doesn't it? How does one who shares the practice of an art (or, say, a branch of that art) dissent from public opinion, or, say, the commonly held opinion of most folks, and not incur disenfranchisement or alienation for holding that belief? 

Using Rudy for a minute (Sorry, Rudy) but lets suppose that I am attending KMAA functions and I watch Rudy teach a module and I decide that what he is teaching is somehow not quite right. Whatismore, suppose I am asked my opinion and I lay it out for everyone to see and hear. Now I would bet a bag of Krispy Kreme Donuts that Rudy would have no problem, but what about the raft of $*** I would probably get from his loyal and adoring (?) fans? 

Let me also approach this a bit differently. In training with the five hyung that we use in the Yon Mu Kwan I have noted some clear deficits. To make a long story short, the kebonsu are simply not universally expressed in the hyung, as only 4 of the 10 can be identified. So I choose to modify the hyung to include all ten kebonsu. Ordinarily this would be an issue between myself and GM Myung,but as I am well-known for my conservative take on KMA I suddenly find myself the focus of a very public crucifixion.  

I know a lot of people would probably say that its just people being people so suck it up or keep your freaking mouth shut. But what sort of option IS that?!? Isn't this why we don't get a lot more participation? Isn't it because people would like to speak their minds but simply don't want the grief so they say nothing? I don't view myself as some sort of hero. I just think that people ought to be able to voice an opinion or a view without being burned-out for it, yes? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD (Nov 16, 2004)

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Stuart:
> 
> OK, then the question actually comes down to a very simple one, doesn't it? How does one who shares the practice of an art (or, say, a branch of that art) dissent from public opinion, or, say, the commonly held opinion of most folks, and not incur disenfranchisement or alienation for holding that belief?
> 
> ...


Bruce,

People should be able to communicate with each other, but just like Hapkido skills some are better than others.

We all need to try harder to get along. but there's no solution or we'd all be robots.


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 16, 2004)

Dear Stuart: 

I wish I could write it off like that but somehow its just not the same. When I was a kid caddying out on the local Golf Course I never heard anything like 
"you have graphite shafts-- YOU SUCK!" Its very much like what Marc was saying earlier. Were we to conduct ourselves as is done in any other arena people would come down on us like a ton of bricks. Its almost like a "brand loyalty" but somehow worse because in the end its all about the same subjectivity over and over again. At least if we were talking about Chevy versus Ford a person could take things out onto a dragstrip and prove a point. In the old days I guess people could have fought duels, maybe. But unless people are willing to fight to the death to prove a point such matters remain hypothetical and that is why I keep coming back to this theme. 

1.) Whatever people are trying to represent as absolute will never actually be proven in fact. 

2.) Since the arguments will always be hypothetical what is the actual position to be resolved? 

3.) And why are most of the relationships among practitioners continually come back to antagonism rather than reconciliation? 

I am left to wonder if martial arts training attracts individuals who unknowingly want to act out conflicts on an "imaginary scale" (in training; in competition) because they are not very good at reconciling conflicts in their own lives. HHmmmm. Gotta think on that one. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Master Todd Miller (Nov 17, 2004)

Dear Todd,

What I hear you saying is I have no problem with Ji then throw in he only learned for 3 years which seems like a backhanded dig. I can deal with it.

Let me make a suggestion. 

Get a hold of some DVDs of Ji students or student of students like Chong Soo Lee it's Hapkido demo & instructional at it's best. Turtle press produced it.

I doubt you'll have much to say about the quality of Ji's Art or what he learned or didn't learn in 3 years which I believe is really 7 years plus.

BTW the only difference between Sin Moo and what Ji taught back in Korea is on the philosophical side not technical. 

Your thoughts would be welcome after that.
__________________


Dear Stuart,

I have seen the dvd you are talking about from Turtle Press!  IMHO it is demonstration Hapkido.  I have worked out with Ji's students & Masters and I feel like I am qualified enough to for an opinion on Ji's style.  With that said, The only issues I have with Ji are that before 1986 Ji never claimed anything about being the Founder of Hapkido then after Doju Nim Choi passed away Ji is all of the sudden the Doju Nim of Hapkido and what I here you and other Ji students saying is that Choi taught Yawara not Hapkido?

I have no doubt that Ji has a great deal of skill but in no way do I believe he learned the total art the Founder taught and this is not meant as a dig so please do not make it into somthing it is not.  

I am of the belief that we all try to train together without egos and then people even Hapkidoin develope freindships and lasting relationships.  Talk goes only so far then we have to practice what we preach.  Again sorry if there was offense taken by any of my posts. :asian: 

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 17, 2004)

Dear Todd: 

".......I have seen the dvd you are talking about from Turtle Press! IMHO it is demonstration Hapkido. I have worked out with Ji's students & Masters and I feel like I am qualified enough to for an opinion on Ji's style. With that said, The only issues I have with Ji are that before 1986 Ji never claimed anything about being the Founder of Hapkido then after Doju Nim Choi passed away Ji is all of the sudden the Doju Nim of Hapkido and what I here you and other Ji students saying is that Choi taught Yawara not Hapkido?....." 

I apologize for stepping in here between you and Stuart in your discussion but you post is a good example of what I have been talking about. I am wondering if you are hearing the vague mix of technical criticism interwoven with political opinion. Your point on "demonstartion hapkido" may be well-founded (I don't know. I have not seen this presentation.) and you go on to mention that you are qualified to have an opinion on his STYLE. However, then you go on to speak NOT to the technique, nor the way that it is presented, but to the *political underpinnings* for it. To my way of thinking this is exactly how we start down the wrong road. For my part I feel I can adequately critique Ji (or any other teacher) in terms of presentation, use of media, organization and most other teaching qualities. Do I have an opinion about JI- the Man? Sure, but that has little to do with how his skills are when he is teaching a group of individuals. If you want to critique the presentation you saw, I would love to hear it, but I think that you have demonstrated where we tend to go wrong in these discussions. Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## MDFJ (Nov 17, 2004)

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Marc:
> 
> Too many good thoughts to comment on them all. Nice job.
> 
> ...



Hi Bruce

Thanks    

I totally agree with what you said there, It would seem from the outset that From the big picture down to the little picture we seem to share much in common, but if something happens to upset this shared belief/ideas then people are ready to forget what they do have in common and focus on arguing about who is right...     :mp5:    :jedi1:     

We are all people, many of us have spent significant portions of our lives dedicated to the learning and or teaching of Martial Arts, more specifically Korean Martial Arts, and in most cases the Hapkido Arts, and however much what we do differs, I honestly would like to think that we each believe we do our very best for our students... 

Some differences between Techniques, Kwans, Teachers, Masters, Certificates, Organisations, History, Lineage etc  becomes not a simple discusion of, 
I do "this", oh you do "that" .. OK, That's cool..   

But more an argument that if you do "that" you must be saying that I am wrong to do "this" and "this is right, therfore "that" must be wrong..

I think much gets mis-interpreted in written text, but I also think that the Protection Bubble Bravery syndrome takes effect on a forum in the same way as it does in a car...

If you drive down the road and someone cuts you up, many people would start cursing and swearing like crazy..   :2xBird2:   calling the other driver all the names your mama would slap you for saying...  However...

If you walked down the road and someone bumped into you, most would turn round and say "oh, excuse me.."   

I liked what you said about peoples "standing in the community"  and I think that may well have a contibuting factor, they care so much about trying to legitimise themselves and gain the recognition that they feel they deserve that they do not stop and realise they may be alienating their peers from whom they seek this respect and recognition.      

It has always been ironically amusing to me to see how much more "fighting" and "dispute"  there is between practioners of same/similar arts/styles than amongst those from completely different styles...

You get Hapkido A  arguing with Hapkido B  so much so to the point of saying "you not real Hapkido, your kwan teaches bad technique, your Master was a fraud who held no legitimate rank... etc etc"  

But,  You wouldn't get the Hapkido A arguing with Kung Fu R saying "your Kung Fu is weak"   

 :uhyeah:     

I am still waiting for "well my dad could beat your dad up"    

Just my thoughts, FWIW

My Very best regards

Marc


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 17, 2004)

This could be a critcal point in this discussion. As a Hapkido practitioner, Marc, how would you want me to relate to you? (Please. This is a serious question, not a shot, 'kay?) Let explain a bit and then I would appreciate some feedback from you. 

I have about 20 years experience in the Hapkido arts. Not as much as some and more than most. I can trace my particular branch of Hapkido through my teacher, and his teacher, to Choi. I have four books published and another 8 on the way. 

Here is my position. 

If I am not careful I could get up on a high horse and look down my nose at what you do. I have seen this happen (and been a part of it) with the Combat Hapkido people here in the States. I don't want to do that. I am also not interested in "recruiting" you to an organization, preaching my particular kwan to you, or lauding my curriculum over yours. So here is the question. In a mutually respectful atmosphere not governed by an organization or owing to a common tradition or teacher, what might be our relationship? I know there are conservatives (I admit to being one of them) who might suggest that working with you on any level would be equivalent to giving you status and standing as a Hapkido practitioner that is unearned. I understand that position very well. But now I am positing  fraternity among people who share common qualities of an art, or perhaps would like to, I don't know. What would you see the relative roles between two people such as you and I in the Hapkido community without some outside authority to dictate what it "should" be?  Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## MDFJ (Nov 17, 2004)

Thanks for your post Bruce, and I do not take it as a pop...    

The way I would personally like to be related to/treated by anyone is the same way I would try to relate to/treat them.. Simply as a human being..  

Anyone who would "look down" at me must believe they are of a Higher Class or quality than me, but how can this ever be quantified.?  

I too have spent 20+ years of my life around Martial Arts, more than some and less than others too..   But if martial arts are a path, a journey, without destination.. Should it matter how far down that path we are?   Or even which path we chose..?

If people change how they would talk to me, based simply on any "political situation" then what type of person are they really?

A Racist Hates people becuase of their Skin colour..  What would that Racist do if they lost their Sight?  How would they Hate then?

Just my thoughts, FWIW 


Marc


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 17, 2004)

Dear Marc: 

".....The way I would personally like to be related to/treated by anyone is the same way I would try to relate to/treat them.. Simply as a human being.. 

Anyone who would "look down" at me must believe they are of a Higher Class or quality than me, but how can this ever be quantified.? ....." 

I know this is hard, but work with me on this. We are both participants in an art which (for better or worse) uses a hierarchy. That would be ONE way to relate to each other. 

We are both part of an art which uses skills sets or one sort or another. That would be another way to relate to each other. 

We both practice an art that is imbued with Korean culture, which traces its origins back to a discrete group of individuals, and which has a variety of motives and values for its use. These would be other ways to relate to each other. 

In case you didn't know I was presented with exactly the same question from KJN Kim when I trained with him in Korea. Since he is in his 70-s and I am in my 50-s he actually asked me how I wanted to relate to him in my role as a student---- as a "son" or as a "younger brother".  I know this sounds curious to we westerners but I think this is where a lot of troubles come in. People automatically make assumptions about their relationships without asking first. So I'm asking. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## MDFJ (Nov 17, 2004)

I think I see what you meant Bruce,  

Ok, just using you and me as an example, perhaps you could consider me your Illegitimate cousin   

I think the Heirarchy is essential within a given group or structure, when everyone on the ladder behaves according to the same moral code set out.  (Not the    "Do as I say, not as I do.." mentality )

The problems occur when people believe their position within one group allows them to have the same position over people in another similar group.

Because of what we (the KMA community) share in common we have many ways to Relate to each other, even when discussing our differences, hopefully all in a positive way.  

My Best Regards

Marc


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 17, 2004)

hhhhhmmmmmm. 

Sounds like a mixed message that I have heard before. 

I can get along with the idea of having an "illegitimate cousin". Where I am crossed-up is in the role of the hierarchy. I talked with Stuart R. about this sometime back. The idea seems to be that people acknowledge a hierarchy and seem to see a role for it, but usually as a way of structuring some ELSE's behavior. Let me give two examples. 

1.) Here in the States the standing joke for parents is to tell a child "no" and then support that with "....cuz I said so." There is the parent-child hierarchy and the parent uses it to control the child. 

2.) In Korea a child--- even a young adult--- can be doing something he shouldn't and be told to stop by an elderly person--- "....cuz I said so". The child usually defers to the elderly person because culture dictates a hierarchy. 

You and I participate in an art that arguably has a hierarchy, for better or worse. It may be identified (as in example 1) or it may be suggested (example 2). Where are you and I in that hierarchy and how does it play into the way that we relate to each other? People have tried blustering by throwing out their vitae/resumes and certifications and standing for everyone to see. Baased on that I think they expect some sort of absolute deference or regard. It has not worked in the past and its not going to work in the future. So how do we address this issue in a constructive way? Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox (Nov 17, 2004)

MDFJ said:
			
		

> I
> I think the Heirarchy is essential within a given group or structure, when everyone on the ladder behaves according to the same moral code set out.  (Not the    "Do as I say, not as I do.." mentality )
> 
> The problems occur when people believe their position within one group allows them to have the same position over people in another similar group.



Hello all,

The hierarchy is essential to maintain a level of QUALITY within the art.  SOmeone with 10 minutes of Hapkido is not the same as a 10year veteran - it is about maintaining standards - not just a pecking order.  There is a standard for SIn Moo, Yon Moo Kwan, etc.

Now, I do believe that within this heirarchy there is a certain set of levels of ability, based on longevity and rank.  Arts like Shotokan do not have these discussions becasue there is a single head (even in two of three seperate organizations) - and the standard is in their rank.  We, in Hapkido, suffer because we have for too long allowed the name to become generic based on the breakdown of a few individuals that as "higher ups" overranked then dumped lots of unqualified Hapkido on the world.

I have always subscribed to the notion that Hapkido came from Choi, Yong Sul. Simple.  He had students that got to various levels.  These students often went out and started their own organizations - and gave themselves rank - this is OK as long as it is associated as such (as in the case of KSW, and the Seo, Suh brothers) - now, I base my judgement on two criteria, 1. How long did they train with Choi (if at all) and what rank did they receive and 2. How did they position that rank to creat what they teach today.

So, in many cases I do not see all of us in one group telling another what to do.  Some are not in this group, while others have a position in it. Now, is it acceptable to have a heirarchy where one group can claim a certain thing - sure, but over another group, not really.  The only time this comes into play at all is when the name Hapkido is used to represent things that some of us might not see as Hapkido - then I feel we have a right and obiligation to question and inform.


----------



## MDFJ (Nov 17, 2004)

Hmm, maybe that is the difference, 

If I am understanding what you are saying, A Western child would yeild to the parent, but not neccesarily an older un-related person, their heirarchy extends to their family but to anyone else the response might be "shut up, your not my Father"  (If you can imagine an indignant child there     )

But that would not be the case with an "Eastern" Child...

So western people living in a western world/society/culture but following an Eastern discipline within their Study of Martial Arts are perhaps caught between the two...?  Is that what you meant..?  

Interesting thoughts Bruce, Thank you, I have enjoyed this conversation.

My Best Regards

Marc


----------



## iron_ox (Nov 17, 2004)

MDFJ said:
			
		

> Hmm, maybe that is the difference,
> 
> If I am understanding what you are saying, A Western child would yeild to the parent, but not neccesarily an older un-related person, their heirarchy extends to their family but to anyone else the response might be "shut up, your not my Father"  (If you can imagine an indignant child there     )
> 
> ...



Interesting point.


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 17, 2004)

Dear Kevin: 

"......So, in many cases I do not see all of us in one group telling another what to do. Some are not in this group, while others have a position in it. Now, is it acceptable to have a heirarchy where one group can claim a certain thing - sure, but over another group, not really. The only time this comes into play at all is when the name Hapkido is used to represent things that some of us might not see as Hapkido - then I feel we have a right and obiligation to question and inform......" 

I think I understand what you are saying, Kevin, and now I want to move forward from that point and I want to use you and I to do it. 

You have your rank and I have my rank. We both practice Hapkido and relate to each other rather well, I think. Now, lets exaggerate the situation a bit. 

You are a seventh dan with 20-30 years of training in some orthodox branch of Hapkido. 

I am a X dan in an art which I have constructed on my own with little or maybe no actual Hapkido training. I represent what I do as Hapkido.

Maybe your first impulse is to disenfranchise me or deride me for the poverty of "provenance" I have compared with your own impeccable lineage. But what if you think the better of it and decide that you want to continue to relate to me regarding Hapkido. Do you try to do it as equals and pretend that the respective assertions about rank and standing don't matter? Do you quietly work to show me the short-comings of my system and the superiority of your own system? Do you magnanimously invite me to join your "authentic" group abnd leave my evil ways behind? Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox (Nov 18, 2004)

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Maybe your first impulse is to disenfranchise me or deride me for the poverty of "provenance" I have compared with your own impeccable lineage. But what if you think the better of it and decide that you want to continue to relate to me regarding Hapkido. Do you try to do it as equals and pretend that the respective assertions about rank and standing don't matter? Do you quietly work to show me the short-comings of my system and the superiority of your own system? Do you magnanimously invite me to join your "authentic" group and leave my evil ways behind? Thoughts?



Hello Bruce,

Wow, lots of stuff to consider here, but I'll give this a go.  I think I am more apt to work with you and try and guide you as best I can - fully knowing that I am not the know all and end all. But I feel that it is wiser to have you in than out.  Now, that does not mean that at first I might not have a bit of a knee jerk reaction to what you might be calling Hapkido...this reminds me of a 4 - 5 year retraining experiment that I tried (unsuccessfully) in a Chicago suburb, where the "Hapkido" was a mixture of some modern Hapkido, Okinawan weapons (learned from a book, I might add) and some teenage mutant ninja turtle stuff... It was a nightmare to try and get this instructor to stop teaching sai forms from a book.  I tried really hard for many years before they simply gave up - I might add I travelled there and back for free - I just wanted them to have exposure to more Hapkido since that was what the club "taught".

As far as asking someone in this position to "join" a group, probably not.  These types of transitions are tough enough on instructors and usually devastating for some students.  I would be happy to help with gradings and curriculum development, if someone wanted to "join" something, I would suggest they join with "me" first then branch out to a larger organization - since I don't charge "association dues" the price is right.


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 18, 2004)

Dear Kevin: 

"......Wow, lots of stuff to consider here, but I'll give this a go. I think I am more apt to work with you and try and guide you as best I can - fully knowing that I am not the know all and end all. But I feel that it is wiser to have you in than out....." 

OK, but now I'm gonna put you on the spot------ mostly because you are the only person whose pitched in from this particular point of view. 

Why would you do this? We both know that you are not gonna make any money from me. And we both know that I won't be leaving my own view of Hapkido arts behind. Still there is no reason not to approach you to get your input and for your part you seem not to have a problem bouncing things off of me. I guess I am going this way because we have been picking apart the folks who are NOT pitching-in and I am not a very good resource since I function a lot on idealism and conservative views. For your part, though, you tend to take a more commercial view of things than I. What would motivate you as a more commercial interest to contribute to an effort whose very definition says that you won't be going home with more cash in your pocket for your effort?  Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox (Nov 18, 2004)

Hello Bruce,

Well, this is howe I look at it.  I may not make money from "you" but if I help you to the best of my ability, I run less a risk of losing others who might run into these groups outside the "Hapkido norm" and feel Hapkido has no merit.

In addition, I would rather have a group "in" rather than out - so if I help out. I can bring folks closer to what I see as a more traditional vision of Hapkido - but at least I don't lose a group to "another" art.


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 18, 2004)

Dear Kevin: 

See, and I think that you are hitting on the very point that a huge part of the KMA population simply does not understand. Just because a person does not join "my" particular organization, or sign-up to a 3-year contract, and start burning incense on an altar to me doesn't mean that helping folks out does not contribute to making the overall integrity of the Hapkido arts stronger. It certainly doesn't pay to have them turn away and join some other fly-by-night affair. Good thoughts! 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox (Nov 18, 2004)

Thanks.   Don't like incense much, the ashes are a pain to clean up... :ultracool


----------



## dosandojang (Nov 23, 2004)

Probably from his brother Doju Nim In Hyuk Suh!


----------



## kwanjang (Nov 23, 2004)

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Kevin:
> 
> See, and I think that you are hitting on the very point that a huge part of the KMA population simply does not understand. Just because a person does not join "my" particular organization, or sign-up to a 3-year contract, and start burning incense on an altar to me doesn't mean that helping folks out does not contribute to making the overall integrity of the Hapkido arts stronger. It certainly doesn't pay to have them turn away and join some other fly-by-night affair. Good thoughts!
> 
> ...



Hello Bruce et all:
This IS very interesting to hear from you folks, and I wonder what makes this train of thought so different than what GM Seo did with JP?????

Sure gets all kind of people fired up over that one, but am I not hearing similar proposals here?  Not defending or supporting anything here, but it just makes me wonder WHERE does taking someone in to keep him from going elsewhere stop?


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 24, 2004)

Dear Rudy: 

"......This IS very interesting to hear from you folks, and I wonder what makes this train of thought so different than what GM Seo did with JP??......" 

I just wanted to say that IMVHO this is a rather dangerous line of questioning. The reason that I say this is that once we step across the line into personalities and their conduct the door is open for everyone to vent their opinion of what is "good" and what is "bad". After that it becomes an even more vaguely defined discussion of motives (and attendent opinions), commerce (and attendent opinions) and standing (and attendent opinions). I have never once seen any good come out of these discussions. In fact it usually deteriorates into a lot of personal attacks and bad feelings. I have no window to see into another persons' heart so I don't know that I would be much good on characterizing whether one persons behavior is all that similar to another persons'. If I had to tease out a line of discussion I think would focus on something more like the following.

"If a leader defines an art for themselves and assigns a leadership role to themselves what is the obligation of students to abide only by standing assigned by that leader as opposed to chasing after rank and standing on their own." 

Thoughts?  Comments? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## kwanjang (Nov 24, 2004)

Hello Bruce:
I dare say your assessment is correct, and this line is no doubt going to cause waaaay more trouble than it is even worth.  Still, I wonder what makes it OK for some to begin a new art and give themselves rank (or have friends or peers do it for them) as we know has happened with some of the most respected pioneers we know, and not for others.  Lord knows I have no love for rank chasers, but I do find it curious to see how some are accepted and even revered while others are scorned.

As you might guess, having spent many more years than most to get where I am ( I always was a slow learner, that I personally am not into rank inflation.  Heck, I even went backward two ranks just to learn from another one of the roots I was tied into.  As you can imagine, I am not thrilled to see some others walk in with half the time spent and claim the same rank I worked my butt off to earn the hard way.  Just the same, I want to have an open mind about it, and my question was not one designed to instigate another round of arguments.  I am simply curious as to what makes up the criteria that makes rank inflation acceptable.


----------



## glad2bhere (Nov 24, 2004)

Dear Rudy: 

If I had answer to that question I would bottle it and sell it! I have pondered exactly the same point over and over again and have not come up with a satisfactory answer. Certainly some part of it is personality-driven. Some part of it is salesmanship. More importantly I find that it has a lot more to do with what people have a NEED to believe rather than what is truth. For instance, I have found that a great many folks need for their leader to be extraordinarily special because, by extension, that makes anyone associated with that personality "special". The more unique, empowered and revered the leader is, by extension so are also his disciples, yes? I think there is also a matter of "magic thinking". By this I go beyond the power of the "magic suit" (uniform) or the "magic space" (dochang) or the "magic rites" (a martial art founded in life or death struggles, say). Instead I think there is a need for people to find a "magic" solution to address all those inadequacies and shortcomings they themselves are unable or unwilling to address. 

What I think I am working to communicate is not that people take on persona-s that they find attractive. Crazy people have been identifying themselves as Napoleon or Anastasia for years. What I think I am working to convey is that there are no shortage of followers who need for these crazy people to really BE Napoleon or Anastasia and will put themselves on the line to make that be real. So are the ranks assumed by leaders legit? They are, if the followers have decided those titles need to be legit. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## dosandojang (Nov 24, 2004)

GREAT POST Kwang Jang Nim Timmerman!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## kwanjang (Nov 24, 2004)

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Rudy:
> 
> If I had answer to that question I would bottle it and sell it! I have pondered exactly the same point over and over again and have not come up with a satisfactory answer. Certainly some part of it is personality-driven. Some part of it is salesmanship. More importantly I find that it has a lot more to do with what people have a NEED to believe rather than what is truth. ...
> Best Wishes,
> ...



Hello Bruce:
So, from your post I can see that the answer is not a clear cut thing.  Perhaps being a dynamic leader is more important than what we think.  In that case, I can certainly see why JP has success.  In the end, only those organizations that provide what their members want/need will survive.  Having said all that, the traditional curriculum may not be nearly as important as we may think it is to the average martial art buff.  

I read somewhere once that being a Master is only valid if there are people who will stay with you long enough to reach black belt.  By extension, a  Grandmaster would then need to raise Masters to be considered a GM.  To have an organization or art recognized, it would simply need to survive the test of time with significant numbers of followers, black belts and Masters in order to become a real martial art (despite what WE think of it today).

Let's look at the various organizations then.
Hap Ki Do survived because of the number of Masters who teach that art and students who follow it.  On the other hand, an art like Kong Shin Bup will probably die out because I have been too strict in granting rank in it.  So, this means I have done my teacher a disservice by following his own example of being tough in granting rank.  Despite being a good art, it won't survive because it lacks numbers.

JPs art will no doubt be much more successful, and it is NOT because of the quality of the material, NOT because he was a legitimate senior in the art, NOR is it because he had proper lineage.  Despite of what the Hap Ki Do community thinks of him, he will survive and prosper because he is good at marketing, a dynamic leader, and very focused on succeeding (read he will do what it takes to succeed).

IMHO, this is not a bad thing, beause he must fill a void we have failed to fill for our people, and it had better be a lesson to us.  IMHO, and I will take lots of flak for this, JP has done nothing more than many of the very original leaders we still follow today.  He took a bunch of techniques, put it together in a nice package, and it SELLS to the numbers.  Suh, Lee, and even Choi did no different as far as I can see, and that is why we have such a hard time documenting what really happened back then.  No one want to own up to their (perhaps somewhat sordid) past.  

The fact is that the very leaders we revere today LEFT their Instructors to start their own thing.  What makes it acceptable is that they have numbers and survived the test of time.  Loyalty has nothing to do with it, and that is something hard to swallow for those who were raised believing that loyalty was an integral part of the art.  The Koreans I know never had a problem with that, as that is part of life.  We are simply too romantic about the arts. 

Numbers are what count my friends, and there is NOTHING you can do about that... it is the way things work.  My suggestion to the proponents of this new group is not to make the same mistakes as I have made, lest you are willing to waste your time and have it fail because of the lack of numbers.  Your policy of exclusion may well be the reason for failure.

I will go back to working NKMAA, and I will do my best to stay honest in my dealings with people and stay away from politics.  I will try my best to ensure rank in NKMAA is valued because of quality and integrity, and I hope in the end my efforts will make a small contribution to the art I love.  I truly DO wish you all the best, and I will continue to follow your progress with interest.  Hopefully you can make it work, as I do believe it is worthy.


----------



## Black Belt FC (Nov 24, 2004)

BRAVO BRAVO kwanjang BRAVO


----------



## MDFJ (Nov 25, 2004)

KwangJang Rudy, 

I always enjoy your posts and this one was no exception.!

My very Best Regards    

Marc


----------



## kwanjang (Nov 25, 2004)

Thank you all

Have a wondeful thanksgiving my friends!


----------



## Disco (Nov 25, 2004)

Thanks Rudy.......Here's wishing you and everyone else A happy Thanksgiving and a safe and joyfull Holiday Season (Christmas and New Years). 

Mike


----------

