Leung Jan's system(s)?

[Gerry Seymour]

I absolutely agree. All this secret stuff is ridiculous in this modern age. In the past you might have wanted to keep things secret so the guy in the next village over wouldn't gain an advantage over you if you had to defend your village's wealth or honor. But nowadays it serves no real purpose. And it actually works against arts that are at a real risk of dying out, or of being transmitted with lots of bad information because the people that knew the important details wouldn't share that knowledge. This is just one more in a long list of reasons I have become rather disenchanted and fed up with "traditional" martial arts.....Wing Chun included. There is just too much BS that goes along with them.

For me, it's just about advancing knowledge. Keeping MA secrets feels like keeping management skills secrets in the business world - it just doesn't make sense to me from a "big picture" point of view. To your point about arts that are waning - I'd prefer to see my primary art's (or even my personal curriculum's) effect on some unrelated schools, rather than see it vanish entirely.

 

[APL76]

Not meaning any disrespect to those who feel they need to protect secrets of their art - just expressing myself. This kind of stuff drives me batty. I completely do not understand continuing secrecy in the modern environment. I can see no reason not to share what we know with each other.

That doesn’t make you wrong, but it does make me frustrated.

Sure, I can totally see why that might irritate people, and that they may even think it's silly/unhelpful. And you are entirely welcome to your opinion, no problem for me.

However being on the other side of it, beholden to keep some things to myself (and obijuansalami is in the same position) out of respect and loyalty to my sifu, and respect to his sifu, I also understand why they kept and keep things to themselves. I know the background to the secrecy, and it goes back to Yuen Kay San. Firstly, it wasn't just about defending yourself against someone and seeing that they don't get your "secret deadly techniques", it was a lot about politics. Politics I'm not going to go it to, but very real politics that is still very present in some wing chun circles today. Secondly its about people making claims to knowledge that they don't have, claiming certain things that some people might claim they know and where they got it from. Essentially, at the moment, it is excruciatingly easy to spot the frauds. The deeper their knowledge is the harder that will get. And I can tell you that since Sum Nung died they have come out of the woodwork in droves.

I disagree that this stuff is ridiculous in the modern age, indeed I would argue that the levels of BS have not only increased but with the internet its getting easier to BS and its more important now than before.

 

[Poppity]

Whilst I can understand that every school has things that are not for outside, hell every school has things which are not openly taught internally.... this entire disagreement has arisen over which part of the foot the YKS lineage may pivot on. I don't think it's helpful or remotely respectful to say someone is incorrect and then refuse to answer them or assist in answering them. It's the equivalent of just sitting in the corner of the room and shouting "wrong!" at people. It would be polite just to not comment at all.

 

[obi_juan_salami]

Whilst I can understand that every school has things that are not for outside, hell every school has things which are not openly taught internally.... this entire disagreement has arisen over which part of the foot the YKS lineage may pivot on. I don't think it's helpful or remotely respectful to say someone is incorrect and then refuse to answer them or assist in answering them. It's the equivalent of just sitting in the corner of the room and shouting "wrong!" at people. It would be polite just to not comment at all.

Its not polite to make comment about systems you dont practice either.

 

[KPM]

I remember....it must have been about 20 years ago now.....Guro Ted Lucaylucay traveled around the US doing a series of seminars for FMA. His entire intent was to share with people some of the nuances and small things or "secrets" they might have missed out on in their training in an attempt to help raise the standard of FMA in the US. Its a crying shame that in the 21st century people still feel the need to play politics and hide things, and rather than help people out they sit back so they can point fingers and say...."Oh look! He obviously didn't learn the REAL thing!"

 

[KPM]

Its not polite to make comment about systems you dont practice either.

Total BS statement.

 

[wckf92]

I can see both sides of this though...while I agree with KPM that wing chun is / may be dying due to the political BS and lineage squabbles, etc... @APL76 has a valid point. I mean, if a student or disciple spends years of hard work, lots of money etc to learn XYZ "special secret sauce training" that nobody else has...it's not right for others to simply demand they share it on some random forum for others to scoop up and then say "see, we have that special stuff too!"
Just my early morning .02 .... now back to drinking coffee

 

[wckf92]

one more thing...

In some WC circles, I'd imagine there are still such things as disciples and from what little I know of that...they are beholden to their Master / lineage under some sort of oath right?

 

[Poppity]

Its not polite to make comment about systems you dont practice either.

maybe, but our kwoon does not measure itself by the conduct of other schools.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Sure, I can totally see why that might irritate people, and that they may even think it's silly/unhelpful. And you are entirely welcome to your opinion, no problem for me.

However being on the other side of it, beholden to keep some things to myself (and obijuansalami is in the same position) out of respect and loyalty to my sifu, and respect to his sifu, I also understand why they kept and keep things to themselves. I know the background to the secrecy, and it goes back to Yuen Kay San. Firstly, it wasn't just about defending yourself against someone and seeing that they don't get your "secret deadly techniques", it was a lot about politics. Politics I'm not going to go it to, but very real politics that is still very present in some wing chun circles today. Secondly its about people making claims to knowledge that they don't have, claiming certain things that some people might claim they know and where they got it from. Essentially, at the moment, it is excruciatingly easy to spot the frauds. The deeper their knowledge is the harder that will get. And I can tell you that since Sum Nung died they have come out of the woodwork in droves.

I disagree that this stuff is ridiculous in the modern age, indeed I would argue that the levels of BS have not only increased but with the internet its getting easier to BS and its more important now than before.

I can see that. And to the extent that it annoys me, it's not you (or objuansalami) that I get annoyed with, because you are keeping your word to someone. It is that someone (still with respect) I'd be annoyed with if I had the intimacy with them to do so. More on that in a moment.

But here's my counterpoint (and I don't expect everyone to agree - it's an opinion, and only worth what any such is worth). I don't really care much about lineage, except as a matter of understanding. By that, I mean that knowing who you studied with and the lineage back to someone of note only matters in understanding how that influences what you know and how that influences your understanding and action. And that only matters if I know something of significance about that lineage. So (using a non-WC example, because I know close to nothing of WC), knowing I studied under Steve Weber and two of his students can help someone within NGA guess some of my approaches, but it doesn't really lend me any legitimacy or expertise beyond that. I find lineage - especially in older arts than my own - a matter of intellectual curiosity, but not a matter of importance. What's taught now is what matters. As for frauds, BJJ is about as open as an art can be, and frauds don't last long in their system.

My biggest issue is that I think secrecy limits the group holding the secret more than anyone else. Because you cannot discuss foot position openly (an infinitesimally minor point, IMO), you also cannot discuss important points of the hows and whys of your system with the larger world. So you cannot debate different usages and approaches and evolve what you do from that, nor help others evolve what they do. It limits the development of the art and the individual in small but significant ways. And the reality (again, in my opinion, for what that's worth) is that a fraud won't be likely to grasp the important points, anyway.

I appreciate you participating in this discussion.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Its not polite to make comment about systems you dont practice either.

I don't agree with that OJS. I comment on what I know or observe of many systems. I've often made comments (some of them even incorrect) about BJJ, and I've never formally studied that system. I have studied Judo and other arts that have a familial relationship to it, and so can understand enough about how BJJ works to make comments on it and ask intelligent questions. Someone who studies something somewhat related to your system shouldn't feel they cannot comment on what they think they know of it. That becomes even more reasonable if those who do study the system cannot speak much of it, so the best information people can share is what someone with related knowledge can tell.

 

[Poppity]

I can see both sides of this though...while I agree with KPM that wing chun is / may be dying due to the political BS and lineage squabbles, etc... @APL76 has a valid point. I mean, if a student or disciple spends years of hard work, lots of money etc to learn XYZ "special secret sauce training" that nobody else has...it's not right for others to simply demand they share it on some random forum for others to scoop up and then say "see, we have that special stuff too!"
Just my early morning .02 .... now back to drinking coffee

I agree I think KPM is right in that TCMAs are dying out or becoming diluted as no traditional master will pass on all his knowledge and the knowledge a master does pass on is of different levels of detail to each student, with the greater detail only being given to a select proven few who do not always teach. Also my understanding is that most traditional teachers are given a set curriculum by their master which authorises them to teach only specific things.

However, where this applies why say to anyone you have it wrong if you have no intention of relaying any further information. It is only for ego.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Whilst I can understand that every school has things that are not for outside, hell every school has things which are not openly taught internally.... this entire disagreement has arisen over which part of the foot the YKS lineage may pivot on. I don't think it's helpful or remotely respectful to say someone is incorrect and then refuse to answer them or assist in answering them. It's the equivalent of just sitting in the corner of the room and shouting "wrong!" at people. It would be polite just to not comment at all.

I don't really understand the idea of secrets not taught to students. That baffles me. If I do that, the art degrades, because my students know less than I did, and if they follow my lead, the art gets more limited over time. Even if they add in some "new discoveries", the art doesn't grow and evolve well if something is purposely held back. I can't think of anything I know that I wouldn't teach to a student. I can, of course, think of students I wouldn't teach some things to - just because they're not ready for them.

And there's really nothing I wouldn't teach to the outside, either. If I was asked to do a seminar to a group outside NGA, there's nothing I'd feel the need to hold back. I'd teach whatever I thought could be communicated and they could absorb in the timeframe available. If someone decides to take my best material and make it part of what they teach - even in an entirely unrelated art - why would that bother me? If someone claims it as their own, I'd be annoyed, but can't see how it would really matter in the long run.

 

[Poppity]

I don't really understand the idea of secrets not taught to students. That baffles me. If I do that, the art degrades, because my students know less than I did, and if they follow my lead, the art gets more limited over time. Even if they add in some "new discoveries", the art doesn't grow and evolve well if something is purposely held back. I can't think of anything I know that I wouldn't teach to a student. I can, of course, think of students I wouldn't teach some things to - just because they're not ready for them.

And there's really nothing I wouldn't teach to the outside, either. If I was asked to do a seminar to a group outside NGA, there's nothing I'd feel the need to hold back. I'd teach whatever I thought could be communicated and they could absorb in the timeframe available. If someone decides to take my best material and make it part of what they teach - even in an entirely unrelated art - why would that bother me? If someone claims it as their own, I'd be annoyed, but can't see how it would really matter in the long run.

I do not profess to understand all of the reasoning behind what is considered traditional. Only that the chain of command is generally considered to be absolute, very hierarchical and unyielding but is discussed in terms of respect and honour.

With regards to secrets from students, I suppose an example might be if you had a student who has a problem with their temper or enjoyed fighting most weekends... maybe you would steer them away from eye gouges and throat strikes.... maybe you would not teach them those techniques at all.

I think that you have hit the nail on the head here.... "the art doesn't grow and evolve well if something is purposely held back" and goes some way to explain why wing chun does not do well in the MMA arena.

However, my Sifu was often quite impressed with the "new discoveries" of modified wing chun where people had analysed and tested. He said that it was an area that was improving all the time.

I think your approach to teaching is describing the western approach to teaching as opposed to the Chinese way. The western way similar to Greek medicine and science is based upon testing hypothesis, conferring and discarding what does not work. The Chinese medicine approach was based upon historical beliefs of life essence and this remained largely unchanged with later discoveries being added on to it. The two different approaches develop different psychologies about what should be taught and how.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I do not profess to understand all of the reasoning behind what is considered traditional. Only that the chain of command is generally considered to be absolute, very hierarchical and unyielding but is discussed in terms of respect and honour.

With regards to secrets from students, I suppose an example might be if you had a student who has a problem with their temper or enjoyed fighting most weekends... maybe you would steer them away from eye gouges and throat strikes.... maybe you would not teach them those techniques at all.

Yes, that's the "they're not ready for it" point. Mind you, I have short tolerance for that kind of behavior, so if they weren't growing and learning to make better decisions, I'd likely stop teaching them, entirely. If they're growing slowly, I'd probably stop giving them any new material and put them on "forms duty" for a few weeks to work on their calmness.

I think that you have hit the nail on the head here.... "the art doesn't grow and evolve well if something is purposely held back" and goes some way to explain why wing chun does not do well in the MMA arena.

However, my Sifu was often quite impressed with the "new discoveries" of modified wing chun where people had analysed and tested. He said that it was an area that was improving all the time.

I think your approach to teaching is describing the western approach to teaching as opposed to the Chinese way. The western way similar to Greek medicine and science is based upon testing hypothesis, conferring and discarding what does not work. The Chinese medicine approach was based upon historical beliefs of life essence passing to different reservoirs where the essence was converted and this remained largely unchanged with later discoveries being added on to it. The two different approaches develop different psychologies about what should be taught and how.

I understand there's a difference in the traditional approach in CMA. I also don't think anyone should stick to any approach (traditional or modern, eastern or western) that doesn't serve them and their students. If I taught in Japan, I'd use a more Japanese-appropriate approach (which I've experienced in small bits). But I know that more information shared grows understanding, and that's not a cultural issue - it's a reality of how people (in groups) learn and develop concepts. By the way, I also strongly suspect that a lot of the claims of "secret teachings" and information withheld are legends. I suspect some instructors claimed secret knowledge to boost their reputation, but taught the same thing the guy on the other side of town taught. It's a nice marketing strategy, especially in a time when everyone is hiding what they do, so nobody can really tell if it's true or not.

The TCMA approach to forms seems to foster this, by the way. I find, in discussions with folks with deep TCMA konwledge and experience, that forms have a higher importance to the art and lineage than I see elsewhere. So the idea of someone "stealing a form" was a big issue. Of course, stealing a form (by seeing it and copying it) isn't anywhere near the same as getting the information that form is meant to teach. All of us who've used forms at any level know that copying the movement of a form doesn't really convey the information a good instructor will use that form to teach.

 

[Poppity]

Well, you know what they say "there are no secrets in wing chun" and technically its true, its all there in the forms exactly as you stated.

However, what appears to be the case in wing chun especially is that there is a regimented approach to thinking, of my sifu did not show me what you might be doing, or my sifu only applied this movement in one way and so that other wing chun is wrong or is some how incorrect. Which is a kind of upside down logic, where people are willingly putting blinkers on themselves.

 

[KPM]

I can see both sides of this though...while I agree with KPM that wing chun is / may be dying due to the political BS and lineage squabbles, etc... @APL76 has a valid point. I mean, if a student or disciple spends years of hard work, lots of money etc to learn XYZ "special secret sauce training" that nobody else has...it's not right for others to simply demand they share it on some random forum for others to scoop up and then say "see, we have that special stuff too!"
Just my early morning .02 .... now back to drinking coffee

Well see, that's the other thing about "traditional" martial arts that I am disenchanted with......this whole idea that you are going to string things along for many years before you teach the "secret" or "good' things rather than just being up front about it and allow a student to progress at their natural pace. Leung Ting guys do this. You hear stories about being in the system for over 5 years before ever touching the weapons. So sure, I can understand where they are coming from as well. Why should someone share openly something that they had to spend years waiting for their teacher to share? But then when does that attitude end? How do you break that secretive cycle? Someone "took an oath to their Sifu" that may have had some justification back in the day. But then they feel the need to require the same oath of their students in modern times when it has become an anachronism. I can see both sides as well. I just think the "other side" is ridiculous in the 21st century.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Well, you know what they say "there are no secrets in wing chun" and technically its true, its all there in the forms exactly as you stated.

However, what appears to be the case in wing chun especially is that there is a regimented approach to thinking, of my sifu did not show me what you might be doing, or my sifu only applied this movement in one way and so that other wing chun is wrong or is some how incorrect. Which is a kind of upside down logic, where people are willingly putting blinkers on themselves.

And that's not unique to WC, of course. I know an NGA instructor who won't teach anything in NGA classes that wasn't shown to him by his current instructor (who wasn't his primary instructor until a few years ago). And this guy also holds rank in another art, which makes it even odder to me that he won't bring that knowledge to bear for his students. For instance, there's no reason he shouldn't teach what he thinks is the best kick for his students, rather than being limited to the exact kicks he was taught in NGA, but he probably will never teach his NGA students an even slightly better kick from his other training. And he won't even discuss different methods of taking falls, because they weren't shown to him by his current instructor.

In a less-egregious display of the same thinking Saito Sensei (Aikido) claims to teach only exactly what he was taught by Ueshiba, and only in exactly the same way as it was taught to him. Someone found one of Ueshiba's old manuals (from the period when he was training Saito) and showed it to Saito, who was pleased to find it supported his claim that he teaches exactly as he was taught. Saito appears to do a very good job teaching Aikido, and is apparently an exception to the general rule that exact copies are not a good idea. I don't know of any other exceptions to this rule, nor can I say with authority that even Saito is one. Given how flawed human memory is, it's unlikely everything Saito teaches is something he was taught by O-Sensei.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Well see, that's the other thing about "traditional" martial arts that I am disenchanted with......this whole idea that you are going to string things along for many years before you teach the "secret" or "good' things rather than just being up front about it and allow a student to progress at their natural pace. Leung Ting guys do this. You hear stories about being in the system for over 5 years before ever touching the weapons. So sure, I can understand where they are coming from as well. Why should someone share openly something that they had to spend years waiting for their teacher to share? But then when does that attitude end? How do you break that secretive cycle? Someone "took an oath to their Sifu" that may have had some justification back in the day. But then they feel the need to require the same oath of their students in modern times when it has become an anachronism. I can see both sides as well. I just think the "other side" is ridiculous in the 21st century.

My view on holding information for later years is simply that something should be held for further intellectual study. But it should be information that is, while interesting, relatively unimportant. I have some techniques I don't bother with until a few years in, because they simply don't add much, but are fun for more advanced students to play with. I don't hide them, of course - if a pair of advanced students are in a class with beginners, the advanced students might well be practicing these very techniques, right out in the open. And if a less-experienced student gets curious (as one of mine did, quite regularly), I'd probably stop and at least show them the technique....maybe even teach it to them if I think they are ready for the fine detail of it.

I've even considered adding another kata, or even two, for folks to tinker with later, because there's not much material left in my curriculum once they reach brown belt. If I added those, some students would get them much earlier, anyway, because some folks really seem to enjoy kata, and they are useful for folks with injuries or other limitations they need time to work on. So, not so much "secret" as "held back for later study". If that attitude drives some of what folks choose to hold back in some WC groups, there's nothing wrong with that. It's even possible the Leung Ting folks decided the weapons were less important, so held them back to focus on the empty hand work for the first few years. That would be a reasonable, um, reason for that decision.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I know the background to the secrecy, and it goes back to Yuen Kay San. Firstly, it wasn't just about defending yourself against someone and seeing that they don't get your "secret deadly techniques", it was a lot about politics. Politics I'm not going to go it to, but very real politics that is still very present in some wing chun circles today. Secondly its about people making claims to knowledge that they don't have, claiming certain things that some people might claim they know and where they got it from. Essentially, at the moment, it is excruciatingly easy to spot the frauds. The deeper their knowledge is the harder that will get. And I can tell you that since Sum Nung died they have come out of the woodwork in droves.

Whilst I can understand that every school has things that are not for outside, hell every school has things which are not openly taught internally

I mean, if a student or disciple spends years of hard work, lots of money etc to learn XYZ "special secret sauce training" that nobody else has...it's not right for others to simply demand they share it on some random forum for others to scoop up and then say "see, we have that special stuff too!"

I can see that. And to the extent that it annoys me, it's not you (or objuansalami) that I get annoyed with, because you are keeping your word to someone. It is that someone (still with respect) I'd be annoyed with if I had the intimacy with them to do so. More on that in a moment.

But here's my counterpoint (and I don't expect everyone to agree - it's an opinion, and only worth what any such is worth). I don't really care much about lineage, except as a matter of understanding. By that, I mean that knowing who you studied with and the lineage back to someone of note only matters in understanding how that influences what you know and how that influences your understanding and action. And that only matters if I know something of significance about that lineage. So (using a non-WC example, because I know close to nothing of WC), knowing I studied under Steve Weber and two of his students can help someone within NGA guess some of my approaches, but it doesn't really lend me any legitimacy or expertise beyond that. I find lineage - especially in older arts than my own - a matter of intellectual curiosity, but not a matter of importance. What's taught now is what matters. As for frauds, BJJ is about as open as an art can be, and frauds don't last long in their system.

My biggest issue is that I think secrecy limits the group holding the secret more than anyone else. Because you cannot discuss foot position openly (an infinitesimally minor point, IMO), you also cannot discuss important points of the hows and whys of your system with the larger world. So you cannot debate different usages and approaches and evolve what you do from that, nor help others evolve what they do. It limits the development of the art and the individual in small but significant ways. And the reality (again, in my opinion, for what that's worth) is that a fraud won't be likely to grasp the important points, anyway.

I appreciate you participating in this discussion.

I don't really understand the idea of secrets not taught to students. That baffles me. If I do that, the art degrades, because my students know less than I did, and if they follow my lead, the art gets more limited over time. Even if they add in some "new discoveries", the art doesn't grow and evolve well if something is purposely held back. I can't think of anything I know that I wouldn't teach to a student. I can, of course, think of students I wouldn't teach some things to - just because they're not ready for them.

And there's really nothing I wouldn't teach to the outside, either. If I was asked to do a seminar to a group outside NGA, there's nothing I'd feel the need to hold back. I'd teach whatever I thought could be communicated and they could absorb in the timeframe available. If someone decides to take my best material and make it part of what they teach - even in an entirely unrelated art - why would that bother me? If someone claims it as their own, I'd be annoyed, but can't see how it would really matter in the long run.

There's another active thread right now titled "The problem with traditional martial arts." It's about sparring (or the lack thereof), but to my mind the fetishization of secrecy is a much bigger problem.

I've been training martial arts for 37 years and BJJ for 20+ years now. My knowledge has been paid for with plenty of hard work, money, broken bones, and so on. What information regarding my art do I hold back from my students? Nothing. What do I hold back from friends I work out with? Nothing. If any of you are ever in Lexington and drop by for a workout, I will be happy to share absolutely anything I know about BJJ or martial arts in general. If anyone on this forum has any questions regarding my art, I am happy to answer, although I am limited by the text medium and many subtle details are hard to communicate without physical demonstration.

Does this make it easy for pretenders to fraudulently claim knowledge of BJJ? Hasn't been a problem so far. When you step on to the mat, we can tell what you know.

Could someone gather all the technical details of BJJ that have been revealed online and use them to construct a fake online jiu-jitsu expert persona to fool the masses? That would actually be a difficult feat to pull off well. There's a ton of information in the art and you can't rely on any special secret detail to prove your authenticity. Every jiu-jiteiro does things a little differently. In order to be convincing you'd need to know why an individual might perform a technique this way or that way. I'd actually be impressed by anyone who did a good job of faking that knowledge without putting in the mat time. (But why bother? It's more fun training for real.)