Marital Arts Recognition

From the moment we decided to publish a Who's Who, we faced the problem of "Who" would be included in the book. Acquiring the names of the historical leaders was not too difficult, but the martial arts have grown so much, and in so many direc­tions, that there are now thousands of martial artists who have contributed major portions of their lives to the practice and development of their art. Yet many of these leaders are unknown outside their own regions.

After considerable effort to identify and locate these leaders, we finally decided to contact several well-known tournament directors for their mailing lists. Our assumption was that anyone who appeared on the lists was acceptable for open competition, and therefore credible at least as far as skill-level was con­cerned. The lists, and the referrals submitted by the people on the lists, were the sources of our initial identification process. As we contacted other reputable people, we acquired additional mailing lists.

In all, just over 15,000 people were contacted, using the lists and referrals as recommendations for listing. Those who respon­ded were asked to record their tournament and teaching history, rank and style, and the individual or association that accredited them. They were also asked to sign a declaration of accuracy and release of the information for publication.

We screened the applications as they were returned, and set aside the surprisingly few with obvious discrepancies. As more and more applications came in, we realized that it was unfair for us to judge the credentials of people we'd never met or seen teach or compete, and who may be thousands of miles away. We then decided the best way to handle the problem was to ask recognized authorities to help screen applicants from their regions, and so we established our Board of Review.

Each member of the Board received lists of every applicant and screened them for anyone known to be of questionable rank or reputation. The seventeen people who make up the Board represent several facets of the martial arts and all parts of the country they are teachers, competitors, officials and ad­ministrators. Although it would have been impossible for them to check the credentials of each person on the list, members of the Board were able to help us identify people who, in their opinion, required further investigation or additional recommendation.

All of us realize that as thorough as we have tried to be, there are no doubt errors of both inclusion and exclusion. For this we apologize and will do everything we can to correct any oversights in future editions. We are updating our mailing lists now, and we are depending on public response to help us make future editions even more comprehensive.

The multi-level review process brings us to the sensitive and complex issue of rank, and the basis upon which rank is awarded or accepted.

There are established associations recognized as ranking authorities. But there are also many martial artists who, either because of their independent nature or for other reasons, find themselves on the outside of these associations.

Our reviews show that individuals of leadership and ability who have found themselves on the outside have often handled the problem of their promotion to a higher rank simply by proclaiming themselves, and stepping forward to be accepted or challenged. If objections to these proclamations amount to no more than a few raised eyebrows and some private grumblings, then how seriously are the objections to the higher rank to be taken?

As it is now, the rank stands if an individual's peers will not step forward to say NO, or take any other action. When the in­dividual's will to BE is greater than the combined will of his peers to deny, then he IS, by the principle of Peer Recognition even if it is recognition by default. Like it or not, this is the system that has always existed in the martial arts.

As ranking authorities we have, at times, denied our respon­sibility to our art by allowing flagrant violations of this practice to go unchallenged. If those of us who are leaders accept the presen­ce of obvious questionable ranks by our own lack of action, then perhaps we should question our own right to be considered a "general authority."

A cooperative national registry of rank could go a long way toward solving the problem of Peer Recognition. Because the need is so great, perhaps such" a registry is not too far distant.

We invite your comments.Jan Wellendorf, DirectorAmerican Martial Arts Associationand Chairman, Board of ReviewWHO'S WHO IN KARATE

George Anderson, Akron, Ohio

Steve Armstrong, Tacoma, Wash.

John Chung, Winston-Salem, N.C.

James Herndon, Chesapeake, Va.

Ted Kresge, St. Petersburg, Fla.

Roy Kurban, Arlington, Texas

Joe Lewis, Raleigh, N.C.

Michael McCoy, Gainesville, Fla.

Chuck Merriman, Niantic, Conn.

Hidy Ochiai, Vestal, N.Y.

Ed Parker, Pasadena, Calif.

Jhoon Rhee, Washington, D.C.

James (Mike) Sawyer, Gainesville, Fla.

Larry Seiberlich, Roseville, Minn.

John Sharkey, Momence, 111.

Alien Wheeler, Powell, Tenn.