Questions on Traditional Wing Chun

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
1

I have trained some in Buddha Hand (Fut Sao) Wing Chun under one of Henry Leung’s students, and I have trained in “Hong Kong” Wing Chun under one of Moy Yat’s students. I have never trained in Traditional Wing Chun, but I have seen some tapes on it, etc.

I must admit, when I first heard William Cheung’s claims about how he was the sole person that Yip Man passed on this art to, I was quite skeptical. Especially in light of the fact that Yip Man’s two sons both refuted this claim, and the fact that William Cheung was close with Bruce Lee, who obviously “modified” Wing Chun to form his original Jun Fan Kung Fu, before he made further changes, and developed JKD concepts. For a long time, I was convinced that William Cheung’s “Traditional” Wing Chun, however effective it may be, must have been his own modified creation of what he had learned from Yip Man’s regular classes.

However, as I looked deeper into this, I found out that several people that I had known that had once studied under Henry Leung, or under Moy Yat, or under Duncan Leung, etc., had gone over to Traditional Wing Chun. Also, when I go over the extent of knowledge that William Cheung seems to have on Iron Palm training, Chi meditation, meridian healing, etc., in addition to some of the rather large differences in TWC itself, it seems very improbable that he could have created all of this himself.

What I find very confusing though is why Yip Man’s own sons would not have been taught this version also, or at least been aware that it existed.

I would be interested in hearing what others think about all of this. I realize that this may be very old and worn as a discussion topic for a lot of people here, but I just recently got back into all of this after being away from it for many years. I want to start studying Wing Chun again, and am seriously considering studying Traditional Wing Chun this time.

2

I’m a student of Rick Spain, one of William Cheung’s most senior guys, who parted ways with him in 1996.

I think most people are skeptical of his origin theory - it stretches credibility to breaking point and sounds like the plot of a bad movie. However William Cheung has AFAIK never changed the story or made any admissions of its falsehood to anybody.

There is some conjecture that he spent some “lost years” on mainland China, out of reach of triads or criminal connections in HK, and learned the stuff there. It’s arguable that he could gain some kudos and credibility by “coming clean” if this were the case, explaining the other story away as the usual Chinese obfuscation for secrecy purposes. But he never has. There was also some conjecture that TWC and Hung Fa Yi have a common source, but both Willam Cheung and Garrett Gee deny this. William Cheung is not afflicted by modesty and would not be reticent to claim credit were there any truth to that conjecture - any such relationship could be profitable to both did it exist.

He claims that he only felt free to teach the “secret Traditional system” after Yip Man’s death in 1973. My first KF instructor, David Crook, with whom I remain friends, trained with him in Canberra, AUS for a number of years. leaned Wing Chun with the pigeon toed stance and a bent wrist bon sao from him; my current instructor was taught TWC with parallel stance and straight wrist on the bon sao (among other differences). So there is SOMETHING there.

You are correct that this has been done to death for about thirty years, and no new revelations are likely. Lineage means less and less in modern times. Effectiveness is what people want these days.

3

Very thoughtful and non-troll post by FlyingCrane - and an excelllent response by Andrew (Anerlich).

I trained directly with Moy Yat for 8 years and have been William Cheung’s student since 1983 - and have been teaching his TWC for over 2 decades now. And yes, to this day I’m still perplexed also about all of this - since, as you pointed out in your post, FC, there’s simply way too much within TWC for William to have simply invented it all.

I’ve been saying that for years, and I still believe it.

And of course if William’s story is true that the mysterious Leung Bik taught TWC to Yip Man (and I don’t believe for a second that Leung Bik never even existed - as some people would tell you)…if the story is true…

then that begs the questions “What ever happened to Leung Bik’s other students in TWC and their descendants?”

“There were none?” “Yip Man is the only person to ever learn TWC from Leung Bik?”

It’s possible, I suppose. But oh, so singular and unlikely - wouldn’t you think?

And then there’s Garrett Gee and HFY; which, contrary to what many people try to maintain, is nonetheless…basically the same system as TWC.

So there’s got to be some big connection between the two allegedly different systems. And for all the myriad names, places, dates, and events given about the supposed history of HFY - none of it can be verified or independently traced.

As is the case with William Cheung’s story.

So what the connection between TWC and HFY is, and where it all came from - we may never really know.

In the meantime…just enjoy the ride.

4

1.) William Cheung DID study other styles than Wing Chun.

2.) Yip Man as a teacher, didn’t explain things in detail to most(if not all) of his students.

3.) Bruce Lee was a friend of his and obviously collaborated on techniques, principles, theories, etc.

4.) Yip man didn’t teach his own sons the “Secret” method? Please. William wasn’t even his most senior student.

5.) If any of you have met William Cheung, you’d know how much he exaggerates in his stories. I’ve heard, directly from him, more than a few times that he fought a “hundred” triads on a boat to Austrailia. Newspapers of the time said he beat up a couple of sailors.

6.) There is absolutely NO historical evidence of any such person existing by the name of Leung Bik.

7.) There has never been anything similar to TWC from ANY of Leung Jan’s students. Not even when he retired to Gu Lao.

Never let sentiment cloud your judgement. William Cheung may be a good teacher and practictioner, but his story is as likely to be true as is the story about Ng Mui creating Wing Chun. Bull**** bull**** bull****.

5

Hi JGTevo,

I am not picking on you, but this post made me think of a few topics here. For the record, I have argued many of the same points. Some of your comments are stated as absolute facts, or atleast they can be read that way. I tend to agree with them, but I think they are much more in the opinion category.

  1. Perhaps. But I am not sure any style would yeild the outcome of what he has.

2)Only those that studied with Yip Man knew what he taught and explained. Certain students had no problem learning and understanding. Many others were just simply common students in a very large class typically ran by someone else. Yip Man rarely taught these people. Others got very intensive explanations. Many sifus talk about this.

  1. Not sure what this had to do with anything? Lee’s wing chun was not like Cheung’s. From what I have heard of early TWC, it looked more like all the other stuff until after Yip Man’s death. Lee’s wing chun look like any one elses. Not sure what influence there would be.

4)We don’'t know what he did and didn’t teach his own sons. THere are lots of theories that even claim he didn’t teach his sons much at all. Or that they were never interested. What we know is they took a lot more interest in wing chun after their Fathers death and that many other people helped to teach them stuff.

5)Could be true. THough I am not sure what that suggests.

6)Yeah, well there is no historical evidence of my granddad. There isn’t any historical evidence of my wing chun teacher or my hung gar teacher. I guess they don’t exist.

  1. We don’t know all that Lueng Jan taught. We have a few lines and many of these are mixed.

Never mix personal sentiment with facts. Almost nothing above is factual. William Chueng’s TWC is his wing chun. Perhaps he got it from Yip Man, perhaps not. Yip Man was familiar with many lines of wing chun and some of the lines that often get clouded up into wing chun. Perhaps Yip Man taught William some of that stuff. Perhaps not. Your points are well taken, they are just second hand (or more), interpretations, and theories. Not facts to base a conclusion on.

6

[QUOTE=FlyingCrane;800403]I have trained some in Buddha Hand (Fut Sao) Wing Chun under one of Henry Leung’s students, . . . .[/QUOTE]
I helped cook at the Yau Lei Restautant (which Henry owned), on Deancy Street for two years. I even lived in the same apartment building with Henry Leung. I was the first one to get a Sifu certificate from Henry Leung and was there during the “development” of FSWC/Gu Yee Kuen. What do you know of the origins of Fat Sao WC?

7

Some Random points, on various topics mentioned. Disclaimer:when I say “WCK”, im refering to the stream from the Opera boats specificaly.

  1. I have looked at the TWC mystery for many years, and come to a conclusion that at the very least, in my opinion, William Cheung believes what he states! Is it so hard to believe a young man(William Cheung), believed what his Sifu (Yip Man) told him?

  2. What Yip did or didnt teach, IMO, and his forth coming on things verbaly is the source of many of the issues.
    Most dont want to percieve things as they are, so im sorry if this offends anyone.

Yip man learned WCK from 3 or 4 differant sources. There is no question about it. Not only did he learn from Chan Wah Shun, and Ng Chun So, but also spent time training with Yuen Kay Shan, prior to his move to H.K. In HK, oral tradition tells us that he trained with his Uncle, CHu Chong Man. Preserved in several branchs of H.K is also that YIp trained with a student of Fung Wah(Leung Jan Fatshan Student). Many will say “we will never know”- not true. We know Yip taught some material to some people, and not to others. That is fact. Its fact this material can be traced to other WCK systems. So unless Yip spontaneously knew all there was to know, he had to have cross studied various approachs.

Old time WCKers didnt live in a vacume. They all cross trained.So the fact that Yip knew material beyond what he taught most, and that he taught some things to those he liked, and not to others, isnt beyond reason. Its Interesting to note that Yips WCK is described in a way (Described the same way by all acounts) that paints a differant picture, than how most of his students applied the system - IE, “I would be controled no matter what i did, and he would just keep smiling at me” - Thats a far cry from, flaily arms, and trying to chain gun punch someone to death, with a mean look on your face!!

3)The fact that WCK had never been taught to larger amounts than 15 people, might help substantiate my opinion a bit that, YM taught a public WCK to most, in respecting how the ancestors passed down the WCK system(one on one). Yip was very traditional, so I believe he took the Chan System, and further streamlined it, and that is what the general H.K system is. This was win win for him, as he would be able to support himself, spread the WCK system, yet respect the ancestors.

My assertation is provable, if one compares Chan Wah Shun family, to other mainland WCK (YKS, Cheung BO, Mai Gai Wong, Lo Kwai, Kulo, ect) which Chan family even though it uses the Centerline, Heel shifting and Odd weighting, like H.K WCK, still has an expanded curriculum and material that is found in other Mainland WCK but not H.K. Its also very similar to what Yip taught to his Fatshan Students (The only real differance between Yip Fatshan and CHan Family is the later incorporates non WCK forms into the family system as CHo Gar does).

It was between the time of his teaching in Fatshan and H.K that he pioneered and refined things into what they are today.

  1. Many parts of the TWC story are based on traditional stories passed down in various WCK clans not something Wiliam created out of a vacume. For example, its a fairly common belief that Chan Wah SHun wasnt taught the full system, but a streamlined version. Reasons being several. First he was off a lower social class, than Leung and the other students. This was common Chinese thought in those times. Second Chan wasnt educated. Three, he tried to learn through "hook or crook: and that ****ed Leung off, and so Leung quality controled his rare WCK system.

If one compares NON H.K WCK, one will fine the truth, that Chans Wah WCK was where the “Center Line” and “Shifting on the Heels”, and “odd weigthings” were introduced, and the ONLY WCK that uses these are those stemming from Chan, Ng Chun So, or most YIp Man. As Cho Gar, Lo Kwai Gar, Mai Gai Wong, YKS, Kulo, Cheung Bo, ect use differant methods.

  1. Leung Bik IMO is a myth (I used to believe in it) and something used to explain why some learned "differant’ material. Leung Jans biography, Pan Nam oral tradition, and Kulo village oral tradition all state Leung Jan had one son named
    Leung Chun and he died infirm very young. I believe his wife died due to complications in the birth. Hence when Leung Jan retired, and was moving back to Kulo village, he DIDNT leave his apothacary to a son, as was traditional for the CHinese to do, as he didnt have one. Instead city records show he sold the store to 2 young brothers, who ended up running it into the ground due to lack of true medical knowledge.

  2. TWC doesnt show up in any decendents of Leung Jans that we KNOW about, but many parts of it, are core common material found in mainland WCK stemming from Leung. What we know from what Leung Jan taught in Kulo Village, what Leung taught Lo Kwai in Fatshan, and what Leungs classmate Fok Bo Chuen taught Yuen Kay Shan - is that they all use the same core! All of it is there. Yet its missing from Chans line !

So my assertation is that Yip knew the differance to Chan WCK , and standard Leung Jan/Mainland WCK. He taught the Chan WCK in a streamlined package to most, and those he liked he dropped jems of the other material. What ever material William learned he than, did his own thing with based on his experiance of fighting. So in my opinion TWC is part Yip man , part core WCK, and part William Inovation, while HK WCK is part Chan Family and part Yip Man.

  1. Ive heard the story of William fighting on the boat in many odd exagerated forms. I know its factual as a young Duncan Leung was on the boat, and witnessed the fight. Sifu Redmond discovered this a few years back during a discussion with Duncan. I think there were 4 sailors. BUT still!!! Thats 4 more than most here have fought in a life time let alone at the same time!!

MOST story tellers embelish, for the sake of “telling a good story” - big deal. Its the art of being a “bard” - that doesnt imply you are purposfully with intent trying to mislead others. Big differance in my opinion.

  1. David crook is a very important part of the puzzle. I spoke with him myself years ago, and he told me the same thing Andrew just mentioned.

  2. WCK masters, were humans, with all the typical human traits of greed, drug abuse, smoking, jealousy. No Big deal. We learn how to fight from them, not how to develop spiritualy.

  3. Im working on a book, with my research group the “AWCKRI”. We are tracing the evolution of WCK , and will contain photo sequences of comparing and contrasting a wide range of WCK styles. Everything ive mentioned in this post will have the physical evidence within the book for others to follow up on, with their own research. I hope to resonably proove at least that WCK split into 3 directions - 1) the Chan Family (including Ng Chun So, Yip Man Fatshan) 2) all the other pure WCK branchs, and 3) WCK hybred with Non WCk systems. Than show how the Chan branch was evolved into what is known as standard H.K WCK, and a 4th group appeared, that combined the H.K way, and the Mainland way (Lee Shing, Yiu Choi , Pan Nam ect)

  4. Fut sau WCK is something ive been investigating a bit. I need to see the entire system or at least the core material to be able to place it and time stamp it. I have heard 3 or 4 differant stories.

A) It was from Yuen Kay Shans second teacher Fung Siu Ching, from the North and that Bot Gwa was used in WCKs creation.

B) It was from 9 dots monk, who learned it within a temple. Evidently this is the most common occuring story. 9 Dots than taught Henry.

C) It was from Leung Jan and was passed down to Leung Family members, Henry being a “Leung”.

or

Some suggest the Fut Sau system is something that Henry put together from several sources.

                                               B
8

Henry told me many times that he learned Gu Yee Kuen (Ancient Chivalry Fist) aka Fut Sao (Buddha Hand) Wing Chun from the Venerable Monk Hsu Yun:
http://www.hsuyun.org/Dharma/zbohy/Home/home-index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hsu_Yun
He called him Gau Jee Woh Seung (9 finger Monk). Henry said the he was named Gau Jee because he had only 9 fingers. He also told us that he learned the Biu Jee form from Hsu Yun while they were locked in a wooden room. During the lesson Hsu Yun died. Henry couldn’t get out of the room so Hsu Yun taught him how to use finger strikes to get out of the room through mind transfer. That’s when a few of us decided to leave. James Cama eventually became his top student. I was there during the “development” of FSWC. I still have some of the drawings of the hand with the Buddist prayer beads that Henry used as traced on a place mat in his restaurant and now uses as his logo.

9

That was an awesome post, byond1 (Brian).

Looking forward to reading the book.

Sounds like you’ve really taken the wing chun historian thing very seriously - and for many decades now.

10

Longtime Aussie Wc instructor Greg Tsoi, was also on the boat, and according to an article in the now defunct Australasian Fighting Arts, also witnessed the fight, which, as Brian said was at most four sailors. A teen against four grown men - pretty impressive, even if the narrow gangways supposedly assisted Cheung by mking it impossible for the sailors to get his flank or attack him more than one or two at a time.

I think the issue that ignites controversy isn’t that YM taught Cheung a different system - that is likely to be true - but the notions that Yip Man taught EVERYONE else an intentionally crippled system which was second rate, and anointed Cheung as his successor in Grandmasterhood, without telling anyone else but Cheung. THIS defies credibility.

Interesting stuff, Brian. Good luck with the project.

11

Just adding my own speculation to the conversation, its is plausible that while escaping from the triads that he was living amonst mainland triads as him and his family were themselves well connected. If he had learnt his TWC from the triads, then its is unlikely he would be allowed to disclose his lineage due to secret oath’s taken upon his initiation, and also it is plausible that he might not have finished the system in China in the 3 year period in which case it would be unlikely that he would got his Sifu’s blessing to teach if indeed he could.

So a style of WC without a Sifu or Lineage would be very un-commercial in the height and fame of the ‘Yip Man-Bruce Lee’ era , so it would make sense to link the two !

So it may not be a simple case of Cheung coming clean and telling us where he actually learnt TWC from…as he may not actually dare to do so in fear of breaking any triad oath’s taken or reprisal for going public without consent. It is still a fact that there are WC lineages on the mainland and in Asia who still choose to remain private.

If indeed the TWC is a top rate system which i dont doubt it is unlikely that Yip Man even if he was himself under an oath of secrecy would choose to pass this ‘secret system’ onto a very young and loud William Cheung rather than to en-trust it to his own two sons.

But who knows ? i’m sure the truth will come out one day and i for one would like to see the ending of this WC Soap story ! In fact i am more intrigued by this than the original Ng Mui-Wing Chun saga …

12

“If indeed the TWC is a top rate system which i dont doubt it is unlikely that Yip Man even if he was himself under an oath of secrecy would choose to pass this ‘secret system’ onto a very young and loud William Cheung rather than to en-trust it to his own two sons.” (SF)

***I CAN tell you what Moy Yat had to say about some of this - as I trained with Moy for 8 years. Yip Man did not have a good relationship with his sons hardly at all. And put their training into the hands of some of his other students. One of his sons in particular, according to Moy Yat, was very upset about his father’s divorce from his mother and his remarriage to another woman. And it caused big problems with his father.

And William Cheung, along with Wing Shun Leung and Bruce Lee, put Yip’s school on the Hong Kong map with their street encounters and challenge matches. So it is definitely possible that Yip chose to teach things to William that he never bothered to make sure that his sons also learned.

Does this help verify William’s claims? Hardly.

But it’s food for thought.

I’ve always suspected a triad connection for TWC myself.

But none of it can be proved, traced, or verified.

13

[QUOTE=Ultimatewingchun;803536]
And William Cheung, along with Wong Shun Leung and Bruce Lee, put Yip’s school on the Hong Kong map with their street encounters and challenge matches.
[/QUOTE]

Vic.. really. Yip put his school on the map, it was popular way before Bruce and Cheung began. WSL def helped in this regard though as one of the earliest students.

Whats my basis.. my Sifu knew all of them personally and is the Shing to Bruce and Bill by many years.

What i dont understand is why no one ever mentions Williams brother, Cheung king kong (sp?) who im told had better skills than he back in the day, when my Sifu knew them. Cheung King Kong bought Kung fu from Ip Man and knew quite a bit as a result.

I dont buy Bills story but i am bias because of what my teacher has said from his experiences. But i respect TWC because people say it works for them and thats all i need to hear. End of.

14

I think that there’s quite a bit of backup testimony originating from a whole bunch of sources (ie.- various students and grand students of Yip Man) to the effect that it was William, Wong, and Bruce who really put the reputation of Yip Man’s school over the top via fights and challenge matches. There was those three guys - and then there was everyone else.

In fact, Moy Yat told me point blank once that Cheung Chuk Hing (William Cheung) was considered the best fighter in the clan. At least that was Moy’s opinion. Which obviously must have been based upon what was expressed to Moy by others who knew/saw William fight - since by the time Moy Yat joined the school in the early 1960’s William was already living in Australia. Now we can argue all day about who’s #1 and who’s #2 (William or Wong)…and so on down the line…

but either way, it should be clear that William was considered to be one of the most elite fighters in the clan - and the biggest/heaviest of all the elite fighters.

Btw…never heard any mention from Moy Yat about William Cheung’s brother being better than him. Or any mention of his brother at all, for that matter.

15

[QUOTE=Ultimatewingchun;803625]
but either way, it should be clear that William was considered to be one of the most elite fighters in the clan - and the biggest/heaviest of all the elite fighters.
[/QUOTE]
Weren’t there others who also did some fighting before during or after this group? I also remember hearing about one or two other students, perhaps from Ip’s first group who were supposedly very good.

Who was known as best among those guys I think depends a lot on exactly what year you are talking about.. No doubt they were all changing and growing and in different ways.. I seem to remember that Bruce had mentioned numerous times to close freinds that he wanted Wong, to test his new stuff on , although I think he was in contact with Cheung too in the later years.. No question in my mind that Bruce had taken his training to a different level, I don’t know if ‘better’ fits but seemingly more rigorous, diverse, alive and with more emphasis on physical fitness..

16

Hey southernkf,

My basic point was that there are other possibilities that are far more likely, than it is that William Cheung got a “Secret System” from Yip man.

Yes, it’s all opinion as to what really happened, though there are more than a few holes in the Wililam Cheung story.

As for point 1 - If no style would yield the outcome that he has, then it probably wouldn’t have been created at all.. all martial arts are derived from various sources… usually starting with actual combat. For point 2, I may have been incorrect on this point, it was what I usually heard around my old school from my instructor and if I remember correctly, on a few occaisions from William Cheung.

For point 3, this I think shows that it is not outside of the realm of possibility that William Cheung could have followed Bruce’s path in trying to refine the style.

4, obviously we do not know what he really taught any of them.. but it is unlikely that he would not have taught, or at least trusted his sons, with the knowledge.

5, what it suggests is that it is not outside of the realm of possibility that he made the whole thing up.

6, do you know how many students Leung Jan had? And Chan Wah Shun? And how many students Yip Man had? And never ANY mention of a Leung Bik from any of them, until William Cheung. Yip Man didn’t mention it to anyone, Leung Jan didn’t mention it to anyone and if he did, they didn’t mention it to any of their disciples/family.

7, but nothing that looks similar to TWC’s footwork…

17

My basic point was that there are other possibilities that are far more likely, than it is that William Cheung got a “Secret System” from Yip man

I don’t like that idea any more than most. But unfortunately there isn’t any “proof” one way or the other. It is all conjecture at best. Though I don’t think it true. In any case, most people seem to be way beyond this arguement anyways.

For point 3, this I think shows that it is not outside of the realm of possibility that William Cheung could have followed Bruce’s path in trying to refine the style.

I don’t think Chueng Followed Lee at all. They did different things. Lee’s was out of necessity. despite some reports, Lee was not well versed in Wing Chun. He left before completing a lot of it. He was not a wing chun “master” when he left. I feel he stayed traditional for a while (Jun Fan) by evolving his gung fu training of wing chun and various sources. Then he started to dabble with other fighting methods and experimenting with what worked (JKD). I beleive William was much more well versed in all of wing chun when he moved on. This too is conjecture, but I don’t believe WIlliam was influenced directly by Lee’s JKD. By this I don’t think TWC is a direct by product of Lee influences (directly or indirectly). But of course I can’tmake that statement with authority as it is just a limited theory.

obviously we do not know what he really taught any of them.. but it is unlikely that he would not have taught, or at least trusted his sons, with the knowledge.

It isn’t unlikely at all. Not all sons have an interest in their Fathers affairs. From my info, the brothers have noted on that they were not interested in wing chun. THere are numerous other accounts where Yip Man students advised them to start learning. Then there are a few accounts of people like Leung Ting and others training them for periods of time. I am sure their father taught them wing chun, I just wouldn’t say their knowledge was anymore special than any one else, at all. Their primary intresest apparently didn’t start until after their father passed. Of course this is the knowledge I have and I would love to hear more if someone has different information. But we can’t say what they knew or didn’t based on who their father was. We don’t know what he taught them.

do you know how many students Leung Jan had? And Chan Wah Shun? And how many students Yip Man had? And never ANY mention of a Leung Bik from any of them, until William Cheung. Yip Man didn’t mention it to anyone, Leung Jan didn’t mention it to anyone and if he did, they didn’t mention it to any of their disciples/family.

lets look at the question. How many students did Leung Jan Have? Who’s records have we seen from Chan Wah Shun? and who exactly did not mention Leung Bik? There are very few records and most are contradictory, most are simply oral traditions. Some lines mention he existed others don’t. Some say he was mentally handicapped, others said he died young. One says he taught Yip Man, and other says he didn’t exist. The problem is we can’t pick and choose among the stories. All we know is there are conflicting stories. But it is interesting to note that Yip Man’s records did not include him. I find that interesting myself. Though several of his students do say he learned from Leung Bik. Several of them were close to Yip Man and would know if Yip Man said it or not. I find this very interesting and a bit disturbing. One important thing is you can’t prove something doesn’t exist because you have no evidence. It may or may not be true.

but nothing that looks similar to TWC’s footwork…

I am not so sure. What exactly have we compared and to what degree? I agree it is different than most lineages but I don’t think it is too different. In other words I still think it closer to wing chun than say Hung Gar or Tai Chi. Difference is just a matter of degree. Pan Nam’s wing chun footwork is quite different as is some other branches. Pan Nam’s wing chun claims something somewhat akin to what HFY and TWC claims. That there is other different lines of wing chun that are apparently built differently. But it is hard to see through Pan Nam’s fusion of atleast a couple versions of wing chun, Hung Kuen, and what ever else he knew. I think we are only seeing a small portion of wing chun that has existed.

Just as a final note, I am not disagreeing with you much at all. Just advising that your comments are more your opinions based on what you have heard. Much of that is just common info that has been passed around the internet for years. But it is hardly proof, hense why the topic keeps coming up.

18

Until you see the HFY footwork. (TWC = HFY).

But even more to the point of what can be verified somewhat - the Weng Chun footwork is not that far awy from TWC (I once had a workout with one of Andreas Hoffman’s top students after Andreas informed me that his man would be spending a weekend in NYC a few years ago)…

and Andreas later told me after I sent him some William Cheung video that TWC looks more like Weng Chun than any other YIP MAN BASED wing chun he’d ever seen.

And then there was Yip Man’s uncle, Chu Chong Man…who was a weng chun Master and living in Hong Kong simultaneosuly with Yip Man.

But Brian probably knows more details than I do about all these possible connections (byond1)…

so again, I’m eager to read his book when it comes out.

19

I don’t think Chueng Followed Lee at all. They did different things.

I meant more in follow in the idea of refining his style, not necessarily technique/strategy/principle/etc.-wise.

lets look at the question. How many students did Leung Jan Have? Who’s records have we seen from Chan Wah Shun? and who exactly did not mention Leung Bik? There are very few records and most are contradictory, most are simply oral traditions. Some lines mention he existed others don’t. Some say he was mentally handicapped, others said he died young. One says he taught Yip Man, and other says he didn’t exist. The problem is we can’t pick and choose among the stories. All we know is there are conflicting stories. But it is interesting to note that Yip Man’s records did not include him. I find that interesting myself. Though several of his students do say he learned from Leung Bik. Several of them were close to Yip Man and would know if Yip Man said it or not. I find this very interesting and a bit disturbing. One important thing is you can’t prove something doesn’t exist because you have no evidence. It may or may not be true.

Obviously, it’s very limited in historical fact… but there are several known students of Leung Jan, and styles that derived from Leung Jan, not through Yip Man, and to my knowledge, no one has mentioned a Leung Bik.

But, you say some of yip man’s students say he learned from Leung Bik? Which ones? I’ve only ever heard William Cheung talk of this. This would lend credibility to his story…

Just as a final note, I am not disagreeing with you much at all. Just advising that your comments are more your opinions based on what you have heard.

I completely agree. I don’t have actual fact to back them up. I’m not a historian.. I’m not discussing what I know, and providing my own viewpoint to (as I said before) was a very one-sided discussion at first. I appreciate any corrections or new information I can learn from this discussion. I’m not afraid of learning a thing or two :slight_smile:

Until you see the HFY footwork. (TWC = HFY).

As far as I know, HFY is pretty controversial in it’s claims, itself.

But even more to the point of what can be verified somewhat - the Weng Chun footwork is not that far awy from TWC (I once had a workout with one of Andreas Hoffman’s top students after Andreas informed me that his man would be spending a weekend in NYC a few years ago)…

That’s interesting. I haven’t seen the Weng Chun footwork.

And then there was Yip Man’s uncle, Chu Chong Man…who was a weng chun Master and living in Hong Kong simultaneosuly with Yip Man.

That could be the source, then.

From what I heard, William Cheung (at least according to my old instructor, who was a direct student of Cheung) added in a few things to TWC (maybe he’s added in more) fairly recently (within the last five years or so)… However, honestly I’m not sure how accurate that is.

20

Victor

I don’t know if you’ve seen these articles. Here are two links where William Cheung (Chang in Mandarin), is mentioned. The first one shows who were the people that “helped” WC’s popularity at that time. The second article is an inteview with WSL.
In that article Bruce Lee asks WSL if he would ever be able to beat him and Chang (Cheung).

http://www.wingchunkuen.com/sumnung/articles/article_lo01.html
http://www.wongvingtsun.co.uk/wslbl.htm