Youthful Masters.

[mal103]

If I was to meet a "Master" of anything i would expect that they have been actually studying and training in the subject for many years. I have met a 5th Dan that was awful because he had been out front shouting at kids for over 30 years but never broke into a sweat - I say this disrespectfully because he is a disgrace to the belt - it's not something I would normally say about a senior Dan grade.

A similar word over-used these days is "expert", I would expect an expert to know a lot about their subject and to be able to develop/react to any aspect of the subject matter. Like a cheap disaster movie where the lead role is discribed as the worlds foremost expert on the subject of the pending disaster - you would expect to see an old professor type with years in the field and not a good looking 25 y.o.

[DWx]

I think this could be a part of the issue if anyone can achieve 1st dan in such a short time and young age. I know a young man that is a black belt after 3 years of training and only 8 years on this earth. So what will this say about his 2nd, and 3rd degree promotion and so on? At some point he will be another young master. I agree that the proof is on the floor, but at what point is the line drawn. Can an 8 year old defend himself if attacked by a untrained 11 year old? Can he demonstrate kata or basics at the proper level? If so great, if not start a junior ranking system. Of course this varies from one org to another. I'll respect it either way. Just asking for your valued opinions.

Well of course I would hope the 8 year old could prove himself both in knowledge and in skillset irrespective of his age. Otherwise he shouldn't really have the belt should he? I'm of the opinion anyone, regardless of age, should be awarded a rank if they check all the boxes and meet all criteria.

Out of interest, at what dan rank do you say someone becomes a master?

In my style it's at 7th dan however in some styles a master title is given at 4th dan.

[ShoriKid]

Good catch Waste lander. I tend to miss things like that. I do spend my spare time getting punched in the head after all.

[bushido_man96]

This is one of those arguments that proves that "the belt doesn't matter," until it does matter.

But perhaps we aren't discussing belts, but ranks, which could be different.

I'll play a little devil's advocate here. Why does one have to be past their physical prime in order to be considered a master? And why not wait to hold judgement on someone or show them respect until after spending some time speaking and training with them? Each should be considered on a case-by-case basis, certainly, but to make a judgement call without any other information is a pretty quick jump to a conclusion.

[bushido_man96]

I think this could be a part of the issue if anyone can achieve 1st dan in such a short time and young age. I know a young man that is a black belt after 3 years of training and only 8 years on this earth. So what will this say about his 2nd, and 3rd degree promotion and so on? At some point he will be another young master. I agree that the proof is on the floor, but at what point is the line drawn. Can an 8 year old defend himself if attacked by a untrained 11 year old? Can he demonstrate kata or basics at the proper level? If so great, if not start a junior ranking system. Of course this varies from one org to another. I'll respect it either way. Just asking for your valued opinions.

Well of course I would hope the 8 year old could prove himself both in knowledge and in skillset irrespective of his age. Otherwise he shouldn't really have the belt should he? I'm of the opinion anyone, regardless of age, should be awarded a rank if they check all the boxes and meet all criteria.

Out of interest, at what dan rank do you say someone becomes a master?

In my style it's at 7th dan however in some styles a master title is given at 4th dan.

Our's is at 5th dan. I'm not crazy about it, but it is what it is.

[sensei8]

I think this could be a part of the issue if anyone can achieve 1st dan in such a short time and young age. I know a young man that is a black belt after 3 years of training and only 8 years on this earth. So what will this say about his 2nd, and 3rd degree promotion and so on? At some point he will be another young master. I agree that the proof is on the floor, but at what point is the line drawn. Can an 8 year old defend himself if attacked by a untrained 11 year old? Can he demonstrate kata or basics at the proper level? If so great, if not start a junior ranking system. Of course this varies from one org to another. I'll respect it either way. Just asking for your valued opinions.

Well of course I would hope the 8 year old could prove himself both in knowledge and in skillset irrespective of his age. Otherwise he shouldn't really have the belt should he? I'm of the opinion anyone, regardless of age, should be awarded a rank if they check all the boxes and meet all criteria.

Out of interest, at what dan rank do you say someone becomes a master?

In my style it's at 7th dan however in some styles a master title is given at 4th dan.

Our's is at 5th dan. I'm not crazy about it, but it is what it is.

Our's is as well, 5th Dan, I too, aren't so crazy about it either because, like most things in the MA, Master, well, imho, it's subjective, to say the least.

[sensei8]

Why does one have to be past their physical prime in order to be considered a master?

They don't have to be past their physical prime. It's just that, all in a nutshell, opinions of the MA, therefore, the opinions of MAists for a certain "frame" to be held up to, and if one's not meeting the expectations of those that view said "frame", then they are cast aside as either good or bad. Stereotyping in the MA happens way to often, and in that, it's that stereotyping that makes it quite difficult to see the forest because of the trees.

And why not wait to hold judgement on someone or show them respect until after spending some time speaking and training with them?

It's easier to tear down someone, then building them up properly!!

[Shizentai]

This is one of those arguments that proves that "the belt doesn't matter," until it does matter.

But perhaps we aren't discussing belts, but ranks, which could be different.

I'll play a little devil's advocate here. Why does one have to be past their physical prime in order to be considered a master? And why not wait to hold judgement on someone or show them respect until after spending some time speaking and training with them? Each should be considered on a case-by-case basis, certainly, but to make a judgement call without any other information is a pretty quick jump to a conclusion.

My sensei said something very poignant on this matter to me once years ago.

If you look at a bunch of competitors, at least in my organization (JKA), you'll see that the people winning the championships both in kumite and especially kata are seldom below their thirties or late 20's at the very lowest (many are even in their 40s). Anyone over the age of 18 is allowed to participate, everyone is obviously considered on an individual basis in a competition, but still you see this trend.

My sensei argued that this is because when looking at a karate-ka's performance over time, there are two important curves to consider: the physical peak, and the mental peak. Given a full life of training most people are at their physically strongest somewhere from 17 to 24 or so (thus most Olympians being so very young). However, with age one's experience level and mental incorporation of this experience into their karate can continue to increase. Where a karate-ka is most technically proficient and actually physically able to use techniques effectively is a combination of both of these two functions.

Around 35 or so a person is still fairly strong, but what's more so, in the 10-15 years of training since their physical peak, they have learned so much through experience, even just on the level of how bodies move, that this increase offsets their decrease in physical stamina and strength. After 45-50 or so, the body decreases a bit more rapidly, but if the mind continues to improve enough, one's karate can accommodate. People who have done this in my opinion are the ones that have cracked the code. They are the ones I would like to train under. Most young masters will simply not have had to deal with the experience of a declining body yet, and may or may not rely too heavily on their heightened physical state to achieve good results. So it's not that their not good, just not experienced.

I think that in a system where rank reflects technical ability in the art fairly well, rank will then naturally follow this trend where most high-level promotions (whatever they may be for your organization) happen from 30 up, depending on a person's special case of course. Sometimes people think too much about strength and misunderstand that this trend of 35-45 peak is artificial, but really, there are just other factors to consider, even just on a performance level alone. This is not even mentioning contribution to the art or responsibilities to students or research or whatever else have you.

[sensei8]

This is one of those arguments that proves that "the belt doesn't matter," until it does matter.

But perhaps we aren't discussing belts, but ranks, which could be different.

I'll play a little devil's advocate here. Why does one have to be past their physical prime in order to be considered a master? And why not wait to hold judgement on someone or show them respect until after spending some time speaking and training with them? Each should be considered on a case-by-case basis, certainly, but to make a judgement call without any other information is a pretty quick jump to a conclusion.

My sensei said something very poignant on this matter to me once years ago.

If you look at a bunch of competitors, at least in my organization (JKA), you'll see that the people winning the championships both in kumite and especially kata are seldom below their thirties or late 20's at the very lowest (many are even in their 40s). Anyone over the age of 18 is allowed to participate, everyone is obviously considered on an individual basis in a competition, but still you see this trend.

My sensei argued that this is because when looking at a karate-ka's performance over time, there are two important curves to consider: the physical peak, and the mental peak. Given a full life of training most people are at their physically strongest somewhere from 17 to 24 or so (thus most Olympians being so very young). However, with age one's experience level and mental incorporation of this experience into their karate can continue to increase. Where a karate-ka is most technically proficient and actually physically able to use techniques effectively is a combination of both of these two functions.

Around 35 or so a person is still fairly strong, but what's more so, in the 10-15 years of training since their physical peak, they have learned so much through experience, even just on the level of how bodies move, that this increase offsets their decrease in physical stamina and strength. After 45-50 or so, the body decreases a bit more rapidly, but if the mind continues to improve enough, one's karate can accommodate. People who have done this in my opinion are the ones that have cracked the code. They are the ones I would like to train under. Most young masters will simply not have had to deal with the experience of a declining body yet, and may or may not rely too heavily on their heightened physical state to achieve good results. So it's not that their not good, just not experienced.

I think that in a system where rank reflects technical ability in the art fairly well, rank will then naturally follow this trend where most high-level promotions (whatever they may be for your organization) happen from 30 up, depending on a person's special case of course. Sometimes people think too much about strength and misunderstand that this trend of 35-45 peak is artificial, but really, there are just other factors to consider, even just on a performance level alone. This is not even mentioning contribution to the art or responsibilities to students or research or whatever else have you.

Solid post!!

[DWx]

This is one of those arguments that proves that "the belt doesn't matter," until it does matter.

But perhaps we aren't discussing belts, but ranks, which could be different.

I'll play a little devil's advocate here. Why does one have to be past their physical prime in order to be considered a master? And why not wait to hold judgement on someone or show them respect until after spending some time speaking and training with them? Each should be considered on a case-by-case basis, certainly, but to make a judgement call without any other information is a pretty quick jump to a conclusion.

My sensei said something very poignant on this matter to me once years ago.

If you look at a bunch of competitors, at least in my organization (JKA), you'll see that the people winning the championships both in kumite and especially kata are seldom below their thirties or late 20's at the very lowest (many are even in their 40s). Anyone over the age of 18 is allowed to participate, everyone is obviously considered on an individual basis in a competition, but still you see this trend.

My sensei argued that this is because when looking at a karate-ka's performance over time, there are two important curves to consider: the physical peak, and the mental peak. Given a full life of training most people are at their physically strongest somewhere from 17 to 24 or so (thus most Olympians being so very young). However, with age one's experience level and mental incorporation of this experience into their karate can continue to increase. Where a karate-ka is most technically proficient and actually physically able to use techniques effectively is a combination of both of these two functions.

Around 35 or so a person is still fairly strong, but what's more so, in the 10-15 years of training since their physical peak, they have learned so much through experience, even just on the level of how bodies move, that this increase offsets their decrease in physical stamina and strength. After 45-50 or so, the body decreases a bit more rapidly, but if the mind continues to improve enough, one's karate can accommodate. People who have done this in my opinion are the ones that have cracked the code. They are the ones I would like to train under. Most young masters will simply not have had to deal with the experience of a declining body yet, and may or may not rely too heavily on their heightened physical state to achieve good results. So it's not that their not good, just not experienced.

I think that in a system where rank reflects technical ability in the art fairly well, rank will then naturally follow this trend where most high-level promotions (whatever they may be for your organization) happen from 30 up, depending on a person's special case of course. Sometimes people think too much about strength and misunderstand that this trend of 35-45 peak is artificial, but really, there are just other factors to consider, even just on a performance level alone. This is not even mentioning contribution to the art or responsibilities to students or research or whatever else have you.

Great post.

Do you think this is style/organization specific?

I was always told that for ITF Taekwon-Do international competition, if you don't win a title by the time you are 25, you most likely won't win one. Perhaps tuls (our equivalent to kata) are more forgiving of age but certainly for sparring, you've got to be at your physical peak or you've got no hope. But then again that may be because of what our particular ruleset promotes compared to the JKA's ruleset.