Too Young to be Traditional ...

What is tradition to begin with, it is an inherited pattern of thought or action; a custom of a specific practice of long standing. When they say long standing is there a time window that says it is now a tradition?

It is also defined as handing over or passing on beliefs, customs, and practices. No indication of any time span that goes along with the term. It makes me wonder if Isshinryu is to young to be a traditional form of Okinawan Karate. Currently some believe that because it is not old enough it does not qualify in this regard, are they right or are they inserting the time span it takes to be considered a "historical" thing.

Traditional is different from historically based or historical. This is much like the recent posts on basics and fundamentals of a martial system. Cool! I suspect it has nothing to do with time. I can say it means to me the practice of passing down a practice of a pattern, thought, and action (3). It has been practiced, thought or studied and that practice involves the patters and rhythms of the system to include what the practitioner feels is the spirit of the founder (what ever that means to each person).

It has passed from Tatsuo to his son, senior Okinawa students, his son-in-law, and many, many Military folks since its naming in 1956 (January 15th). It is also comprised of a modified older set of basics, fundamentals, kata, etc. I can say that in my estimate, very loose one too, it has passed through more than three generations of practitioners.

I guess you can say that my argument of is Isshinryu to young to be a traditional form of karate from Okinawa? Nope, it seems to fit. Fits well enough for me anyway :-)   ...   ;-)