Well, fast risings in rank are not a bad thing all the time. I have a friend who trained for years and only got up to green belt before he came to Japan. He rocketed up in the ranks while he was here. His old teacher kept him jumping through hoops to beat some sort of control and loyalty before he would promote him. So he had the skill. It was just funny giving him hell all that time about how fast he rose in rank.
Yes, Skill is skill, and should be recognized. And I like the example you have given of training for a while and then getting rank in a shorter time frame this could be just that the person did not what to be ranked until maybe later in life they wanted to teach others. So, in his case it seems bad for why he did nto get rank earlier, but I can think of good reasons for the person on on this could happen.
But if someone is acting like an idiot with a bokken just a year ago and is now wearing a black belt, well.... I would like to hear the reason why. I am less concerned about his lack of skill than in the danger he poses to other students.
Yes the danger factor is a major concern no matter the art.
But of course, I wonder how you can tell someone that they are just not good enough to train with you. It is something I am thinking about as my remaining time in Japan gets shorter and shorter. I do not want to spend my time training with students who are idiots like the one in this story. But unless someone really does something that breaks the rules, how can you really tell them that you want them to stop training? I can say it to a person, I am just worried about possible legal problems if I do and can't give a reason like they broke the rules. Telling someone to leave just because they are not up to my standard sounds like it might open me up to being sued.
I have had this talk only once. The guy hurt others outside of class. I told him he should not train until he understands what he did wrong. Walking through a reception line and trying joint locks on people is just wrong.
My local Modern Arnis Instructor when I started has always kept it small. If there was someone who needed help money or time he always tried to help and offer them training as long as they were serious and tried. Yet, he also would talk to people about how they do not come to class regularly or how they seem to be very hesitant about this aspect of the art, so maybe they should try training somewhere else. If the student just not like the risk of getting their hands hit wth sticks (* Surgeon / Musician *), then we can guide them elsewhere.
I think the key is that you do not tell them they absolutely cannot, but that they just seem not to fit in and or are not somehow meeting a standard even though it is just verbal. I mean one could say it was a control issue, for you alone could make that judgement as the instructor that he moved to fast with not enough control in dangerous situations, or that they were late all the time and just seemed not interested so you jsut explained to them that maybe training elsewhere would increase their enthusiasm.
Also if it must be absolute, I would do it one on one so it is his word versus yours.
We have told people we do not train children. There are lots of programs out there that do. We do not, unless the parent is a studnet in the class as well, and then the child must be paying attention and interested and showing desire to learn, and this usualy does not occur until the mid teens, and even there it is hit or miss. The Parent aspect is not to force them to go away, but to make sure the parent understands and has felt what the student is learning. We have never had student / parent try to say we are discriminating against them this way.
When I was asked after the one case where I told him he could not train, I replied that I cannot unlearn what he has learned, but I do not have to teach him more, and would be in my opinion at risk if I did so, knowing what he had done.
This art deals with some dangerous stuff. I do not want to hold my training back because I do not trust a student to actually use something like a rokushakubo with intent and not actually hit and kill their partner. But after some months of training, letting someone go for that reason sounds iffy in a nation where daytime TV is filled with advertisements from lawyers asking you to sue someone.
And that is not a rant that I think is exclusive to the Bujinkan.
I tihnk Don, which I was trying to get too above, is that if you make it about safety and security, and also a binding agreement, it is like a lease of an apartment from month to month, with 30 days notice either can end the relationship and there is no cause for recourse. If you look at it as a business transaction you can end the transaction, and if you refunded their last payment, they would not have any money issue to come after you and it also shows that you were not dismissing people and trying to keep their money. As to the safety and security, you can let them go as they have not meet your standards. The only issue I could see with this is that if after a few months or years you only let White Males go no matter what, then one could say there is a pattern to go after you. (* I know you would not, which is why I can raise this point.
*)
Also remember you have to have something of sufficient value for them want to go after, so if you have a big business, and lots of money personally, from work or family, it might be best to make sure before you teach you are incorporated with a Limited Liability (LLC) which means that they can come after you business and not you, in most cases. I am sure there are exceptions to this as there are always.
).
