Aikido has no reason to prove itself!

[Urban Trekker]

I think we're on the same page. But again, why do you think actual masters are so rare in martial arts? We have no shortage of people who have mastered all kinds of other complex skill sets. Carpenters, plumbers, electricians... lawyers, surgeons, pilots, professional athletes (or perhaps their coaches). So, what makes martial arts unique?

I agree with you, but in the case of skilled tradesmen, "master" is a defined level. In other words: apprentice, journeyman, craftsman, master.

I know of no martial art that follows that model. Granted, boxing and MMA have journeymen, but it has a different meaning.

 

[Urban Trekker]

If it was pushed as something akin to Tai Chi or Yoga, these issues wouldn't exist.

Which is something I don't think can be done convincingly or successfully. I'm fairly certain that anyone seeking that of experience isn't likely to be interested in simulated fighting with a partner.

 

[JowGaWolf]

But again, why do you think actual masters are so rare in martial arts?

Not sure. I never really thought about it.

 

[Hanzou]

Which is something I don't think can be done convincingly or successfully. I'm fairly certain that anyone seeking that of experience isn't likely to be interested in simulated fighting with a partner.

I could have sworn that there were Aikido branches that were dedicated solely to kata practice.

 

[Hanzou]

Yeah I didn't use the word master because there are very few in the martial arts world that would qualify. Lots of self appointed masters.

I would say guys like Rickson Gracie, Relson Gracie, Renzo Gracie, Keenan Cornelius, Ryan Hall, Garry Tonnon, Gordan Ryan, Dean Lister, John Danaher, Eddie Bravo, and others are definitely masters.

 

[Steve]

I agree with you, but in the case of skilled tradesmen, "master" is a defined level. In other words: apprentice, journeyman, craftsman, master.

I know of no martial art that follows that model. Granted, boxing and MMA have journeymen, but it has a different meaning.

Great point. Though the formal labels in a trade are really just structured, objective evaluation of skill and experience. The progression is one that can be seen in any other skill set, novice to journeyman to expert to master. For example, there are surgeons who are bona fide experts in their field, and then, among those surgeons, there are experts to whom the experts look for guidance.

 

[Steve]

I would say guys like Rickson Gracie, Relson Gracie, Renzo Gracie, Keenan Cornelius, Ryan Hall, Garry Tonnon, Gordan Ryan, Dean Lister, John Danaher, Eddie Bravo, and others are definitely masters.

There are probably hundreds (possibly thousands) of legitimate, bona fide masters in BJJ. At the point where someone is evaluating and innovating within the style, you can be pretty confident they are at a very high level of proficiency.

And you didn't even mention any of the elite female talent that is out there. Because the skills are applied, people are able to develop the combination of technical expertise and experience that leads to mastery.

BJJ isn't alone in this.

 

[Urban Trekker]

I could have sworn that there were Aikido branches that were dedicated solely to kata practice.

If there are, I haven't heard of it. I imagine that they could market themselves as something in between yoga and cardio kickboxing.

There are probably hundreds (possibly thousands) of legitimate, bona fide masters in BJJ. At the point where someone is evaluating and innovating within the style, you can be pretty confident they are at a very high level of proficiency.

And you didn't even mention any of the elite female talent that is out there. Because the skills are applied, people are able to develop the combination of technical expertise and experience that leads to mastery.

BJJ isn't alone in this.

I think the whole controversy around the word "master" is that, outside of the skilled trades, it implies that other people within the same activity at lower levels are expected to pay homage to such a person that the word describes. This conflicts with the humility that is emphasized in TMA.

There's also the implication there's always something to learn, rendering a martial art impossible to "master." I consider that to be philosophical babble, which is something I never put much weight on.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I would say guys like Rickson Gracie, Relson Gracie, Renzo Gracie, Keenan Cornelius, Ryan Hall, Garry Tonnon, Gordan Ryan, Dean Lister, John Danaher, Eddie Bravo, and others are definitely masters.

But do they have the title of masters? Or refer to themselves as master? I don't know how the ranking system works beyond black belt

 

[Hanzou]

But do they have the title of masters? Or refer to themselves as master? I don't know how the ranking system works beyond black belt

Rickson definitely is. I'm not sure if he refers to himself as such, but he has damn near mythical status in Bjj. Beyond that, I was say other Coral belt holders (belt beyond black) like Pedro Sauer would definitely qualify.

 

[Steve]

If there are, I haven't heard of it. I imagine that they could market themselves as something in between yoga and cardio kickboxing.


I think the whole controversy around the word "master" is that, outside of the skilled trades, it implies that other people within the same activity at lower levels are expected to pay homage to such a person that the word describes. This conflicts with the humility that is emphasized in TMA.

There's also the implication there's always something to learn, rendering a martial art impossible to "master." I consider that to be philosophical babble, which is something I never put much weight on.

Wholeheartedly agree, which is why I try to reclaim the terms and use them in a more concrete way consistent with how the rest of the human activity tends to use them.

 

[JowGaWolf]

What I would really like to see is a International Ranking Martial Arts Body for Functionality.
1. you have to be able to use a certain number of techniques from the system you train from the areas of Striking, Grappling, Throwing, and Weapons. (Depending on what the system has)

2. Then have a concept, strategy/tactics, history, knowledge part about the system.

Waivers for certain parts would be acceptable for things like (too old for sparring, or health issues like permanent injury. This information can then be used to build an international Lineage / System database, that will be used to assist in the history testing of the lineage that one fall under. In other words, people who train under the same teacher will have similar information. This would help to verify one's lineage and identify shifts in teachings (not for the purpose of stopping the changes). If changes in teaching can be accurately identified then you can tell when a system starts to head towards "non-combat function teaching" and identify which lineages or branches teach what.

This would stop all of the "What works and what doesn't work." because there would a "Master" that represents the system at a higher quality level and has demonstrated his or her ability to apply the techniques.

Techniques should being used should be identifiable. When you see it, one would say "That looks like" or one would be able to show the technique in it's Curriculum

Technique application cannot be System A vs System A It would have to be used against other systems.

 

[Urban Trekker]

What I would really like to see is a International Ranking Martial Arts Body for Functionality.

Basically, an accrediting body, right?

I agree, but I don't ever see this happening. Not only will ineffective martial art schools not seek accreditation, but many schools that teach martial arts that are effective probably won't seek it either (due to *insert philosophical babble here*), which would effectively make the ineffective martial arts indistinguishable.

 

[isshinryuronin]

When someone has invested so much time and money into learning a certain thing, it's going to be difficult for them to come to grips with the fact that it was all for naught.

Depends on what "naught" refers to. One must understand that martial arts is a very, very broad topic, like a huge wheel, offering its practitioners a wide variety of benefits, the hub of which is self-defense. But there are many spokes radiating out from this hub in all directions: health, sport, combat, self- development, intellectual; joint locks, pressure points, throws, kicks, strikes, hard, soft......All these spokes support the wheel's total MA rim.

While the hub may be what all else revolves around, the hub is not the whole wheel. It does support the rest of the wheel and acts as an anchor for the spokes, and each spoke is connected to the self-defense hub. But the other end of the spoke are connected to the rim/tire at different places. Different places for different people and goals.

Your quote in many cases may be very true, IF the practitioner has gone into it without understanding where on the rim the school's/system's spokes will lead him. Since all the spokes radiate out from the self-defense hub, there will be benefit in this area no matter what spokes are chosen. Each spoke leads to different beneficial qualities on the rim. We can choose the ones we want to follow to our end goals.

Developing this wheel metaphor was hard work, and I'm a little "tired" so I'll stop here and hope it was not "all for naught."

 

[Steve]

Basically, an accrediting body, right?

I agree, but I don't ever see this happening. Not only will ineffective martial art schools not seek accreditation, but many schools that teach martial arts that are effective probably won't seek it either (due to *insert philosophical babble here*), which would effectively make the ineffective martial arts indistinguishable.

While some styles do have an accrediting body (in fact, it's national and international governance is a requirement for any olympic sport), it's helpful but not essential.

BJJ, as an example, has a pretty reliable ranking structure. Progression is predictable and based on a combination of performance and technical expertise. TKD has this, too. So does Judo. Wrestling, Kyokushin Karate, Sambo, fencing, Savatte, Western Boxing, San Shou...

It's how two people who have never met, who train with people who have never met, from hundreds or even thousands of miles away, can show up to a tournament on a Saturday morning and compete on a level playing field. Without some objective standards for performance and expertise, people would get murdered all the time. It would be unsafe.

But somehow, on local, regional, national, and international scales, this happens all the time. For some styles. Not all. Not Aikido. I just can't put my finger on the common denominator... I guess it's a mystery we'll never solve.

In Aikido, a guy can show up and it's an utter crap shoot.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

why do you think actual masters are so rare in martial arts?

When you were young, you have skill but you don't have ability. When you get older, you have ability, but you no longer fight in the ring (or on the mat).

 

[Urban Trekker]

While some styles do have an accrediting body (in fact, it's national and international governance is a requirement for any olympic sport), it's helpful but not essential.

BJJ, as an example, has a pretty reliable ranking structure. Progression is predictable and based on a combination of performance and technical expertise. TKD has this, too. So does Judo. Wrestling, Kyokushin Karate, Sambo, fencing, Savatte, Western Boxing, San Shou...

Right, but those are associations that regulate specific martial arts. Ineffective martial arts can regulate their own ineffectiveness.

What I mean is an accrediting body for all martial arts. If we look at colleges, Dartmouth is a liberal arts college and MIT is a polytechnic university - two institutions of higher learning with differing curricula, yet both are accredited by the New England Commission of Higher Education (NECHE).

This hypothetical accrediting body would basically do the same for martial arts.

 

[Steve]

Right, but those are associations that regulate specific martial arts. Ineffective martial arts can regulate their own ineffectiveness.

What I mean is an accrediting body for all martial arts. If we look at colleges, Dartmouth is a liberal arts college and MIT is a polytechnic university - two institutions of higher learning with differing curricula, yet both are accredited by the New England Commission of Higher Education (NECHE).

This hypothetical accrediting body would basically do the same for martial arts.

I get it. I don't think it's realistic, and I'm not sure it would be all that helpful for many reasons. For one, the type of accreditation you're referring to is academic. In other words, it's governance over the sharing of academic expertise. Let's just consider academic accreditation:

* Accreditation for a college or university is voluntary.
* The accrediting body is non-governmental and is not itself accountable to any standard. This means...
* Each accrediting body sets its own standards for accreditation (i.e., it is entirely subjective), and
* there are many accrediting bodies, some more prestigious and reliable than others.

So, as I think about it, it's already analogous to the IBJJF or the International Judo Federation or ITF/WTF Tae Kwon Do. I mean, they are different governing bodies that carry varying weight and institutional legitimacy depending on who is asking. And it's also analogous to the sketchy belt by mail, self defense accreditation bodies that will certify that you are 100% lethal and qualified to certify people officially dangerous.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

All well and good, EXCEPT, rather than "each teacher" adding input to the system, I would revise that to each master! Unless one has spent many decades dedicating their life to their art's system and understanding all its nuances and principles completely, they have no business changing it. That just potentially invites a bunch of crap to be incorporated into the system and then passed down to future generations. Too much of that has already been done in some lineages. IMO, very sad.

Counterpoint - BJJ has evolved tremendously in recent years. Heck, just since I started training a couple of decades ago the "best practices" for a number of fundamental techniques have changed drastically. (For example, the body mechanics for a guillotine choke as taught by the best practitioners now are completely different from what I learned 20 years ago.)

That change has not been primarily driven by "masters" who have spent many decades dedicating their life to the system. Instead, innovations can come from any practitioner who discovers a new technique or a new way of doing an old technique. If they have success on the mats, then other practitioners will try out their idea and experiment to see if they can make it work for themselves, improve upon it, or find counters for it. If that experimentation shows that the innovation holds up, then it will start to spread further and instructors will start teaching it.

I'm not saying that teachers with many decades of experience dedicating themselves to the art never produce innovation, but from what I'm seeing much of this evolution is driven by practitioners with much less time in the art. Often the innovators aren't even black belts when they start contributing to the evolution of the art. For example, Ryan Hall was a 23 year old brown belt when he started producing instructional videos which were hugely influential in the BJJ world.

The key to this is that changes to the art are tested under pressure by the community as a whole. That's what prevents "a bunch of crap being incorporated into the art and passed down to future generations."

 

[Tony Dismukes]

But do they have the title of masters? Or refer to themselves as master? I don't know how the ranking system works beyond black belt

For the most part, no. BJJ doesn't have an official title of "master" and I've never heard a BJJ practitioner (even a very advanced one) refer to themselves as such. I remember a seminar once where the host tried to refer to Renzo Gracie as "Master" and Renzo's response was along the lines of "No, no, no, my name's Renzo."

Helio Gracie is frequently referred to as "Grandmaster" in some circles, but that's more a title referring to his status as one of the original developers of the art.