Questions regarding Systems - Organizations - Headmasters

[Tony Dismukes]

Tshadowchaser suggested I spin off a new thread from my questions in a previous one.

In response to comments by Kong Soo Do and tshadowchaser, I had asked some questions:

So this brings up another question. What, if any, is the benefit of having someone designated at the "head" of a system? Why do you need that sort of hierarchy?

and

This raises more questions. Does a martial arts system need to have an organization? Does it need to be a single organization? What is the purpose of the organization? Does it need to be run by one person as opposed to a board of some kind? Does that one person need to be a "grandmaster" with all the assorted baggage of that title? Could it instead be a "president" who serves a limited term and just carries out certain specified duties?

I've got some ideas on the matter, but I'm curious as to what others think.

 

[Xue Sheng]

So this brings up another question. What, if any, is the benefit of having someone designated at the "head" of a system? Why do you need that sort of hierarchy?

The Benefit is to making money IMO, that is all. Some can argue standards but all to often those standards do more for profit than the art itself

This raises more questions. Does a martial arts system need to have an organization? Does it need to be a single organization? What is the purpose of the organization? Does it need to be run by one person as opposed to a board of some kind? Does that one person need to be a "grandmaster" with all the assorted baggage of that title? Could it instead be a "president" who serves a limited term and just carries out certain specified duties?

Basically you are setting up a money making business, IMO, that is all. As to the need for a "Grandmaster" not only no but Hell no.

The "current "Yang Family (Yang Zhen Duo and Yang Jun) setup am organization and by their standards My sifu can practice Taiji but I am not sure he can teach it by the standards of their organization. I most certainly cannot by the standards of their organization. Now my Sigung could train and teach Yang style because he learned form a member of the Yang Family but I am not sure it they make the cut off 1 generation removed or 2. Use to know, but I really don't care so I never kept up with it.

But wait, there is hope, I can be recognized...all it takes is lot of time and "money" and going to train with a person trained by a Yang family member or of course Yang Jun himself

And hey they just made a Bruce Lee Jun Fan org too..... yeah that's not a money making venture

I guess I am just to old, to jaded and have been in CMA to long to take any of this overseeing org stuff seriously

 

[Buka]

In any dojo, club whatever, somebody has to be in charge in some way. If there are questions about something, anything, there has to be somebody to ask. That could be in a small club or a large organization. How training is conducted has to fall upon someone's shoulders. Even if it was a bunch of guys meeting in a garage, somebody has to own the garage, and somebody, maybe several of them, determines what goes on during training.

I'm not part of an organization. But there's a group of us who train for a long time now. Some of the guys teach, some don't. But because I've been doing it longer, more in depth, and with more varied instructors, questions usually fall to me by default. If I'm not sure of the answer, I turn to others, or to organizations I'm friendly with, specifically experienced in the question asked. My designation and title used by all I train with is "Coach", has been for twenty years now. I'm not really in charge, just the one they turn to for anything they can't figure out for themselves. (God help them all!)

Bottom line - somebody has to lead.

 

[Reedone816]

Organisation needed as the common communicator to outside and to put standardisation/doctrination to the inside.
In sort, creating order.
So is title needed? In everybody-knows-everyone, not needed. But in big system it just as some measuring stick on our journey of comparing and learning.
So title=leadership no, but it is a good bet if title=more experience=more technical proficient=know more **** to talk about ;-)
Sent from my RM-943_apac_indonesia_207 using Tapatalk

 

[drop bear]

Also the reputation of the club that is important. I would not like to have worked hard to make drop bear fu a respectable name and have some gibbon mess it up because he is doing whatever is entering his head at the time.

 

[K-man]

This raises more questions. Does a martial arts system need to have an organization? Does it need to be a single organization? What is the purpose of the organization? Does it need to be run by one person as opposed to a board of some kind? Does that one person need to be a "grandmaster" with all the assorted baggage of that title? Could it instead be a "president" who serves a limited term and just carries out certain specified duties?

The Aikido school I attend is totally independent. My Karate school is loosely affiliated with some other like minded places but I organise my own gradings etc. My Krav school is a branch of an organisation, not that they make any money from it. From my point of view my Aikido instructor has the knowledge and ability to teach without the need to refer to an outside authority. I believe my Karate to be the same. As to Krav, where I am a comparative newcomer and basic level instructor, I am grateful that I have people far more knowledgable than me who can grade my students (my choice) and help me get to a higher level.

However, having said all that, we have no grandmasters or anything like that. Organisations have their place but I have yet to find one where politics doesn't rear its ugly head.
:asian:

 

[jezr74]

I had always thought the Master, GMaster tradition were for keeping the linage passed on. For arts that are less renown or have less students, it would fall on them to keep the art alive.

 

[Carol]

Martial arts is a blind item. You don't really know what you are buying. And by "buying" I mean being a student, whether you are entering in a financial contract with a big name school, or shaking hands with Joe down the street that teaches close friends in his garage for free. Lineage is a way to help a potential student understand what they will be studying.

 

[Carol]

When I was training in Silat, our system head was referred to as a Grandmaster on flyers promoting the seminar with him when he was in town. But he was never introduced as "Grandmaster" and didn't want to be called anything other than Guro.

I'm more likely to address a teacher simply as "Sir" or "Ma'am", regardless of where they are within the hierarchy.

 

[Rich Parsons]

The Benefit is to making money IMO, that is all. Some can argue standards but all to often those standards do more for profit than the art itself

Basically you are setting up a money making business, IMO, that is all. As to the need for a "Grandmaster" not only no but Hell no.

The "current "Yang Family (Yang Zhen Duo and Yang Jun) setup am organization and by their standards My sifu can practice Taiji but I am not sure he can teach it by the standards of their organization. I most certainly cannot by the standards of their organization. Now my Sigung could train and teach Yang style because he learned form a member of the Yang Family but I am not sure it they make the cut off 1 generation removed or 2. Use to know, but I really don't care so I never kept up with it.

But wait, there is hope, I can be recognized...all it takes is lot of time and "money" and going to train with a person trained by a Yang family member or of course Yang Jun himself

And hey they just made a Bruce Lee Jun Fan org too..... yeah that's not a money making venture

I guess I am just to old, to jaded and have been in CMA to long to take any of this overseeing org stuff seriously

Xue,

/* bad sub titles and voice over */ You have insulted my (GM/Master) Instructor and my Family. We must now fight until one of either of us, agrees with the other or we tire out and drink lemonade.

Tshadowchaser suggested I spin off a new thread from my questions in a previous one.

In response to comments by Kong Soo Do and tshadowchaser, I had asked some questions:

Originally Posted by Tony Dismukes
So this brings up another question. What, if any, is the benefit of having someone designated at the "head" of a system? Why do you need that sort of hierarchy?

and

Originally Posted by Tony Dismukes
This raises more questions. Does a martial arts system need to have an organization? Does it need to be a single organization? What is the purpose of the organization? Does it need to be run by one person as opposed to a board of some kind? Does that one person need to be a "grandmaster" with all the assorted baggage of that title? Could it instead be a "president" who serves a limited term and just carries out certain specified duties?

I've got some ideas on the matter, but I'm curious as to what others think.

While I agree with Xue, that many times it is about the money, I think it is about the Illusion of Money. So many people believe they will make a million dollars and live the life of a trend setter. People believe the money is there. This is not "Field of Dreams" where if you build it they will come.

I also think someone had to lead.

I think someone has to answer the questions.

Someone has to make decisions about protocol and so forth.




I was teaching at an event. Everyone was using the GM Title or equivalent. Someone called me GM as well. I asked them to not do that. Someone else over heard this and asked me why?

I stated that as I am in my 40's and I do not have an organization, and I do not have Master instructors underneath me with instructors underneath them and colored belt students underneath them. And while one might argue that I am the head or one of a couple chosen to teach a system, I still only have a few private students, and I am still in my 40's and I am still not three or four levels deep in students.

So you see Xue, I see the illusion of Money, and now it requires a lot of work, and I make as much or more doing my day job.
PS: If we are at an event let me know and I will buy us a drink so we can talk this out.

 

[jks9199]

Complicated questions...

This weekend, I had the privilege of watching 13 or so men, titans of my system, promoted to the highest level of achievement in our system. As such, they have the title "grandmaster." Know how I address most of them? "Joe." "Bob." "Wakeel." "Geoff." "Lloyd." One or two are "Dr." -- mostly because I don't know them all that well, and they are actual doctors.

Let's be real: As skilled as these men are, as much as they know -- it's meaningless outside of our organization. A grandmaster in one style may have to know stick, sword, dagger, and empty hand techniques. Another may simply know one sword system.

System heads... They are needed in some form, if and only if you want to have a coherent system that can be passed on. They may not have a fancy title, but someone has to be the one to say "this is how we do it" or "we don't do that." Otherwise, there'll be 20 versions of everything, and no consistency. Without that, you don't have a body of knowledge that can be passed on as a whole. In a small system, they may be known without any selection/nomination/recognition, just "he's The Guy." Once you move beyond a handful of people -- especially as they get separated geographically -- someone needs to be recognized and singled out. But that's only if you care to have a unified system. (And, by the way, it could be a panel of someones...)

 

[Xue Sheng]

Xue,

/* bad sub titles and voice over */ You have insulted my (GM/Master) Instructor and my Family. We must now fight until one of either of us, agrees with the other or we tire out and drink lemonade.




While I agree with Xue, that many times it is about the money, I think it is about the Illusion of Money. So many people believe they will make a million dollars and live the life of a trend setter. People believe the money is there. This is not "Field of Dreams" where if you build it they will come.

I also think someone had to lead.

I think someone has to answer the questions.

Someone has to make decisions about protocol and so forth.




I was teaching at an event. Everyone was using the GM Title or equivalent. Someone called me GM as well. I asked them to not do that. Someone else over heard this and asked me why?

I stated that as I am in my 40's and I do not have an organization, and I do not have Master instructors underneath me with instructors underneath them and colored belt students underneath them. And while one might argue that I am the head or one of a couple chosen to teach a system, I still only have a few private students, and I am still in my 40's and I am still not three or four levels deep in students.

So you see Xue, I see the illusion of Money, and now it requires a lot of work, and I make as much or more doing my day job.
PS: If we are at an event let me know and I will buy us a drink so we can talk this out.

:hmm: which one to go with the standard "You have offended my family and you have offended the Shaolin Temple." or the "Enough talk. Let's fight! Shashabooey!"

Rich I mean no offense and generally when I get in these discussions I think from the POV I have developed in my training which tends to be CMA. I also am rather appalled at how TKD has gone since my involvement in it in my youth. I tend to forget you FMA guys and your setup.

I am also old and jaded and have no illusion of money, heck I'm not even allowed to touch it anymore...I'm married It is just that I have seen multiple Grandmasters in CMA when there are no grandmasters in TCMA and better yet guys insisting that their students call then Sigung (which means my teachers teacher) which if you think about it means they taught themselves. That it gives me a laryngeal spasm

The thing I was getting at was that there are those with the illusion that if I am a grandmaster of my own organization I will get more students and make more money.

As for the FMA side of the house I am clueless and I apologize if any offense was given

No as to my original conundrum as to what to say.... first let me say "There is no charge for awesomeness ... or attractiveness"

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Some random thoughts:

Having someone as "head" of a system can be about money (or the illusion of money), but I suspect that ego gratification is a more common motivation.

I'm not convinced that having a centrally dictated set of standards for an art is of any particular value.

My core arts (BJJ, Muay Thai, boxing) seem to get along just fine without a grandmaster to decree what is acceptable or maintain order or see to the survival of the lineage. Many other arts do as well.

An organization larger than an individual school can be of value for certain limited purposes, such as organizing competitions. I see no reason why such an organization would need to be run by a "grandmaster" with final say-so over the art.

I haven't observed that arts which have a "grandmaster" in charge maintain higher standards or are more resistant to change than those which do not.

Arts which do have a single head person in charge seem prone to frequent splintering as multiple individuals in each new generation of teachers decide that they want to be in charge and leave to found their own system.

 

[Mark Lynn]

So this brings up another question. What, if any, is the benefit of having someone designated at the "head" of a system? Why do you need that sort of hierarchy?

I agree with the others that you need someone to lead, someone to go to, etc. etc.

This raises more questions. Does a martial arts system need to have an organization? Does it need to be a single organization? What is the purpose of the organization? Does it need to be run by one person as opposed to a board of some kind?

I think that all of these questions are fair and valid and they all depend upon the organization and are different for each organization. For instance in the TKD organization that I belong to Home they clearly state how they were founded what their mission is etc. etc. AKATO was meant to be a way for independent karate schools to network together, a way for orphaned or independent black belts to continue their education in the martial arts and continue to advance in rank etc. etc. They serve a different purpose than say the International Modern Arnis Federation who's purpose is to pass on GM Remy's Modern Arnis system.

So to say whether or not an single organization needs to head a martial art system, or if it should be governed by a single person or a group, or a board, or what have you, I think is painting to broad of a brush stroke.

Does that one person need to be a "grandmaster" with all the assorted baggage of that title? Could it instead be a "president" who serves a limited term and just carries out certain specified duties?

Again different organizations serve different purposes and have different goals in mind, therefore they need to be run differently. If a martial system wants to have a title of GM bestowed upon their leader of the organization they have that right and who am I to say they can't or it is improper. Likewise if they wanted a president to be elected every X amount of years they could do that a well. Just FYI I believe the DAV (the German Arnis Association) elects their leaders and they serve a term. Here on this page you can see that they use the term President

Deutscher Arnis Verband e.V. - Board of Directors

Over the years in the Modern Arnis camps I had always heard about Datu Dieter and about his organization the DAV, when I went and trained with them in 2007 he corrected me and told that that position is elected and the DAV is not "his", he was just elected into a position of leadership. Per this website Dieter although a higher rank is listed as the chief instructor and not the President (who has lower rank).

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I agree with the others that you need someone to lead, someone to go to, etc. etc.

Why? You need teachers of the art, but why does someone need to be in charge of the whole thing? BJJ, Judo, Sambo, Wrestling, Boxing, Muay Thai, and many other arts do just fine without that sort of central authority.

...
If a martial system wants to have a title of GM bestowed upon their leader of the organization they have that right and who am I to say they can't or it is improper. ...

I don't think anyone would say they don't have the right or they can't or it's improper. The question is whether it adds any value.

 

[Mark Lynn]

The Benefit is to making money IMO, that is all. Some can argue standards but all to often those standards do more for profit than the art itself. Basically you are setting up a money making business, IMO, that is all. As to the need for a "Grandmaster" not only no but Hell no.

Xue

I can't speak to your experience in the CMAs but in my limited experience I've seen both good and bad in the organizational aspects of the martial arts. However for the point of discussion I point out the good things I have seen in having an organization.

In regards to standards, I do believe that organizations can help hold up the level of quality in the martial art system. I wrote earlier in a post about the DAV, I was fortunate to get a glimpse of this organization when I went over to Germany for their summer camp in 2007 and spent a week training with them. I was invited as a guest observer to watch their black belt gradings and they were very good. The camp itself was extremely organized, well run, you could see variations in the skill levels of everyone, meaning the beginner ranks looked liked beginners, the intermediates like intermediates, the advanced liek advanced students and even on the black belt tests each degree of black belt had something that was different i.e. skill set, principles something that set that rank apart from the others.

Yes they do make money, but they do provide value in their training, their organization and promotion of their training camps both in Germany and abroad in the Philippines for their students etc. etc. All of this leads to some good quality instruction for their students. In short from my limited perspective the funds they pay help support an organization that gives back to their students.

The AkaTo organization that I belong to Home works in a similar fashion to promote and support various independent karate and TKD schools. They have continuing education classes for advanced belts and black belts in different subject matters in regards to the martial arts, they promote cross training in other arts by having various instructors teach special seminars or clinics, they hold monthly kobudo classes in a standardized curriculum so that their students can gain experience in another art and broaden their view of the martial arts. They hold a yearly tournament to allow their students to get to compete on a peer to peer basis, they hold belt gradings etc. etc.

Now they have several member schools in several different states, but the majority of the schools in this organization are like mine, small independent schools being taught out of a Recreation Center, a gym, a YMCA etc. etc. locally here in N. Texas. But they don't dictate to me what I should teach, how I teach it, what my rates are, how often etc. etc. They have had me teach small clinics for them on the FMAs, they have supported seminars for the likes of Dieter and Dan Anderson when they were in the area etc. etc. None of my students are paying members of the organization yet they still get the benefits of the organization through me (like attending the tournament etc. etc.) AkaTo isn't a huge money maker for GM Yates, in fact he still has a day job, he still teaches, writes and runs his organization on the side. He does this out of the enjoyment of the martial arts.

Some organizations serves the students (like I believe both AkaTO and the DAV do), some want the students to just serve them. Not all organizations are the same.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Tshadowchaser suggested I spin off a new thread from my questions in a previous one.

In response to comments by Kong Soo Do and tshadowchaser, I had asked some questions:

So this brings up another question. What, if any, is the benefit of having someone designated at the "head" of a system? Why do you need that sort of hierarchy?

and

This raises more questions. Does a martial arts system need to have an organization? Does it need to be a single organization? What is the purpose of the organization? Does it need to be run by one person as opposed to a board of some kind? Does that one person need to be a "grandmaster" with all the assorted baggage of that title? Could it instead be a "president" who serves a limited term and just carries out certain specified duties?

• I've got some ideas on the matter, but I'm curious as to what others think.

What, if any, is the benefit of having someone designated at the "head" of a system?
Honestly, a lot of that has more to do with how the art develops. Not all arts have a head of system. There is no grandmaster of Taekwondo in the Kukkiwon. There is no soke of kendo in the FIK.

The benefits of having a single person in a leadership role are the same as in any other organized activity; it keeps people on point, provides a means of arbitrating between the ideas of the group, etc. Good leaders are a benefit. Bad leaders ... well, there are plenty of those and the results are never good.

Why do you need that sort of hierarchy?
Technically, you don't. But if an art becomes widespread, it helps for all of the reasons that any other widely practiced and systematized activity is helped by having a hierarchy.

Does a martial arts system need to have an organization?

If you want the art to exist outside of a small family or local group for any length of time, yes.

Whenever a system is taught across more than one school, you need some means of preserving the system. Think of all of the old wives tales and some of the 'incorrect' ways of performing techniques that creep into a system. If there is nobody holding the reins to steer it back on track, you end up with deviations form the original, each of which is practiced by people who are convinced that their deviation is the original way, when in reality, none of them were the original way.

Does it need to be a single organization?
No, but each organization usually preserves the art as it was practiced by the founder of that particular organization, hence the differences in practice between the Kukki taekwondo and Chang Hon taekwondo. They're both taekwondo, but one reflects the way of practice as agreed upon by the collective in the Kukkiwon and the other reflects the way of practice as set down by General Choi in the establishment of the ITF.

What is the purpose of the organization?
Varies from org to org, but in general, to serve as the custodians of the art, establish teaching and training norms, qualifications for opening a school (even if money is the sole qualification, it's still a qualification), and to establish a way of measuring the progress of practitioners.

Does it need to be run by one person as opposed to a board of some kind?
No; it can be either.

Does that one person need to be a "grandmaster" with all the assorted baggage of that title?
No. Not all arts use that title.

Could it instead be a "president" who serves a limited term and just carries out certain specified duties?

Yes. Some organizations do have a president who serves a limited term (the Kukkiwon/WTF comes to mind, but they're hardly the only ones).

 

[Xue Sheng]

Xue

I can't speak to your experience in the CMAs but in my limited experience I've seen both good and bad in the organizational aspects of the martial arts. However for the point of discussion I point out the good things I have seen in having an organization.

In regards to standards, I do believe that organizations can help hold up the level of quality in the martial art system. I wrote earlier in a post about the DAV, I was fortunate to get a glimpse of this organization when I went over to Germany for their summer camp in 2007 and spent a week training with them. I was invited as a guest observer to watch their black belt gradings and they were very good. The camp itself was extremely organized, well run, you could see variations in the skill levels of everyone, meaning the beginner ranks looked liked beginners, the intermediates like intermediates, the advanced liek advanced students and even on the black belt tests each degree of black belt had something that was different i.e. skill set, principles something that set that rank apart from the others.

Yes they do make money, but they do provide value in their training, their organization and promotion of their training camps both in Germany and abroad in the Philippines for their students etc. etc. All of this leads to some good quality instruction for their students. In short from my limited perspective the funds they pay help support an organization that gives back to their students.

The AkaTo organization that I belong to Home works in a similar fashion to promote and support various independent karate and TKD schools. They have continuing education classes for advanced belts and black belts in different subject matters in regards to the martial arts, they promote cross training in other arts by having various instructors teach special seminars or clinics, they hold monthly kobudo classes in a standardized curriculum so that their students can gain experience in another art and broaden their view of the martial arts. They hold a yearly tournament to allow their students to get to compete on a peer to peer basis, they hold belt gradings etc. etc.

Now they have several member schools in several different states, but the majority of the schools in this organization are like mine, small independent schools being taught out of a Recreation Center, a gym, a YMCA etc. etc. locally here in N. Texas. But they don't dictate to me what I should teach, how I teach it, what my rates are, how often etc. etc. They have had me teach small clinics for them on the FMAs, they have supported seminars for the likes of Dieter and Dan Anderson when they were in the area etc. etc. None of my students are paying members of the organization yet they still get the benefits of the organization through me (like attending the tournament etc. etc.) AkaTo isn't a huge money maker for GM Yates, in fact he still has a day job, he still teaches, writes and runs his organization on the side. He does this out of the enjoyment of the martial arts.

Some organizations serves the students (like I believe both AkaTO and the DAV do), some want the students to just serve them. Not all organizations are the same.

Nothing against making money, it is when it becomes the main focus I have issues and in many organizations that is all to often the main focus. And if AkaTo is working that's great, my youngest Aikido school falls under Aikikai and I have no problem with that based on the way the Sensei runs his school.

But from the CMA perspective it gets silly, just look at the Yang's organization and then look at the PRCs Duan system and you start to see the issues.

 

[Rich Parsons]

:hmm: which one to go with the standard "You have offended my family and you have offended the Shaolin Temple." or the "Enough talk. Let's fight! Shashabooey!"

Rich I mean no offense and generally when I get in these discussions I think from the POV I have developed in my training which tends to be CMA. I also am rather appalled at how TKD has gone since my involvement in it in my youth. I tend to forget you FMA guys and your setup.

I am also old and jaded and have no illusion of money, heck I'm not even allowed to touch it anymore...I'm married It is just that I have seen multiple Grandmasters in CMA when there are no grandmasters in TCMA and better yet guys insisting that their students call then Sigung (which means my teachers teacher) which if you think about it means they taught themselves. That it gives me a laryngeal spasm

The thing I was getting at was that there are those with the illusion that if I am a grandmaster of my own organization I will get more students and make more money.

As for the FMA side of the house I am clueless and I apologize if any offense was given

No as to my original conundrum as to what to say.... first let me say "There is no charge for awesomeness ... or attractiveness"

Xue,

Of course I was not really upset or offended. I opened that way, to show that the Illusion is the Illusion. Some may make some money, yet there is never really that magic piece they are looking for. As Panda stated, "There is no secret ingredient", there to me is no real money. Those who work hard can get buy and even enjoy life. I do not see those working and living on yachts though.

So I kinda of agreed with you, only there was a small piece I wanted to take further than you. To those who want to make money where there is no money.

I may not have been clear on that.

It is all good.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Xue,

Of course I was not really upset or offended. I opened that way, to show that the Illusion is the Illusion. Some may make some money, yet there is never really that magic piece they are looking for. As Panda stated, "There is no secret ingredient", there to me is no real money. Those who work hard can get buy and even enjoy life. I do not see those working and living on yachts though.

So I kinda of agreed with you, only there was a small piece I wanted to take further than you. To those who want to make money where there is no money.

I may not have been clear on that.

It is all good.

Oh man, and I was so hoping to get to use the line..... So - I see you like to chew... how about you chew.. ON MY FIST!!!!!!!!!
You know, I think I may have watched Kung Fu Panda to many times

Rich

I appreciate your post, thanks...but I'm going to hold you to this

If we are at an event let me know and I will buy us a drink so we can talk this out.