Having put forth a somewhat concise description of the AJKA-I ranking system, I'd like to move on to how rank carries over to other styles and how some different styles establish rank.
Many people will look down upon styles that utilize time-in-service for determination of testing for the next rank, saying that this is widely used by McDojos. While I agree, there is also a certain status quo that time-in-service represents; namely, effort put into training, deck-time and desire for advancement. The military also uses time-in-service for determining promotions, and during peace times or at bases in the US and in stations that don't see much action, this is largely the only useful method for promoting commissioned and non-commissioned officers. If it's good enough for the military, why shouldn't it be good enough for martial arts schools?
Obviously, the military and martial arts academies are hardly parallels, and the argument can be made that time-in-service in the military often accurately represents a soldier's efforts in serving and training, but depending on the quality-control in a martial arts school, the same assumptions can be made. What we do see, however, especially in the military, is rank being given for tasks/missions accomplished, which is much the same as giving rank to martial artists that successfully compete at an elite-level. Martial arts elitest/purists will often say that there is an aspect in promoting a person that falls upon their character development and such other arbitrary justifications, but how does one judge that? I know many elite and high level karate-ka that are boorish and immature, as well as children that have somehow achieved a high rank. Personally speaking, one's physical ability and knowledge of a martial art should be the only representation of one's rank.
With that being said, with my nidan rank (and hopefully soon-to-be sandan), I should theoretically be able to to transition to any JKA-style, Shotokan school and retain my rank and continue on from there. However, depending on how strict the ranking system is within that school, I may be told to restart, or that I have "3rd-kyu technique" or any number of other negative statements. However, if I went to a school with very lax requirements such as Tiger Schulmann's (not Shotokan but serves to prove my point), then I might very easily seem to outrank the instructor running the class. That last statement certainly sounds immodest of me, and it was, I'm highly modest of my ability but I've seen enough Tiger Schulmann's karate classes...it doesn't pay to be modest in this regard.
Any martial arts style from Japan, China or Korea, tend to follow similar ranking systems with a black belt/sash/obi being the highest belt color with a variety of gradations above that. There are other styles, such as mixed martial arts, Western boxing, wrestling, muay Thai and their derivatives that have little in the way of ranking systems. Time-in-service has little emphasis on one's being an authority and there are no belts around their waists. How do they determine hierarchy? Simply by one's ability and knowledge. The old way, and personally speaking, the only right way to judge rank.
I'm sure we've all heard of supposed 12-year-old 5th dans, and then those ever so powerful 15th dan practitioners, and let's not get started on the plethora of titles that you can here for practitioners. At the end of the day, let's all question our rank. What is our rank worth to others, but most importantly what does your rank represent to you and how do you represent your rank?
Many people will look down upon styles that utilize time-in-service for determination of testing for the next rank, saying that this is widely used by McDojos. While I agree, there is also a certain status quo that time-in-service represents; namely, effort put into training, deck-time and desire for advancement. The military also uses time-in-service for determining promotions, and during peace times or at bases in the US and in stations that don't see much action, this is largely the only useful method for promoting commissioned and non-commissioned officers. If it's good enough for the military, why shouldn't it be good enough for martial arts schools?
Obviously, the military and martial arts academies are hardly parallels, and the argument can be made that time-in-service in the military often accurately represents a soldier's efforts in serving and training, but depending on the quality-control in a martial arts school, the same assumptions can be made. What we do see, however, especially in the military, is rank being given for tasks/missions accomplished, which is much the same as giving rank to martial artists that successfully compete at an elite-level. Martial arts elitest/purists will often say that there is an aspect in promoting a person that falls upon their character development and such other arbitrary justifications, but how does one judge that? I know many elite and high level karate-ka that are boorish and immature, as well as children that have somehow achieved a high rank. Personally speaking, one's physical ability and knowledge of a martial art should be the only representation of one's rank.
With that being said, with my nidan rank (and hopefully soon-to-be sandan), I should theoretically be able to to transition to any JKA-style, Shotokan school and retain my rank and continue on from there. However, depending on how strict the ranking system is within that school, I may be told to restart, or that I have "3rd-kyu technique" or any number of other negative statements. However, if I went to a school with very lax requirements such as Tiger Schulmann's (not Shotokan but serves to prove my point), then I might very easily seem to outrank the instructor running the class. That last statement certainly sounds immodest of me, and it was, I'm highly modest of my ability but I've seen enough Tiger Schulmann's karate classes...it doesn't pay to be modest in this regard.
Any martial arts style from Japan, China or Korea, tend to follow similar ranking systems with a black belt/sash/obi being the highest belt color with a variety of gradations above that. There are other styles, such as mixed martial arts, Western boxing, wrestling, muay Thai and their derivatives that have little in the way of ranking systems. Time-in-service has little emphasis on one's being an authority and there are no belts around their waists. How do they determine hierarchy? Simply by one's ability and knowledge. The old way, and personally speaking, the only right way to judge rank.
I'm sure we've all heard of supposed 12-year-old 5th dans, and then those ever so powerful 15th dan practitioners, and let's not get started on the plethora of titles that you can here for practitioners. At the end of the day, let's all question our rank. What is our rank worth to others, but most importantly what does your rank represent to you and how do you represent your rank?
