# William Cheung, Leung Ting



## Brother John

I am not a Wing Chun practitioner, but appreciate the styles practicallity and the skills of it's practitioners.... I just want you to know that I don't intend to stir ill-will by posting this question, it's spawned by curiousity and my desire to fill my gaps of ignorance.

Several years ago I recall reading several articles in Black Belt Magazine and Inside Kung-Fu Magazine in which it was being debated as to who was Grandmaster Yip Man's legitamit successor... William Cheung or Leung Ting. (hope I'm not mispelling either)

What ever came of this debate??

ALSO: Why does Leung Ting use the spelling Ving Tsun?
is it as simple as the difference between Madarin and Cantonese or what???

Thanks for helping!
Your Brother
John


----------



## Phil Elmore

I'm not well-versed in the history enough to be able to say who's the "legitimate successor" or not, but I can tell you what I've learned in the research I've done so far, having just started Wing Chun in the Cheung lineage.

Here I'm grossly overgeneralizing, but the Cheung people strike me as friendly and pleasant, while the Leung Ting people have, at least on and off, a reputation for being unpleasant.  I don't know any so I'm just repeating what I've heard;  I'm not saying it's true.

I honestly don't know why the difference in spelling.


----------



## Hansson

The difference in spelling is about registered trademarks. I guess correct pinyin is Wing Chun. Other variants I've seen is Wing Tsun, Ving Tsun, Ving Tchun.


----------



## tmanifold

Most of the problems with the Leung Ting group came in the form of Emin Boztepe. He is pretty much a thug. He jumped Williem Chueng at a demo. He has since split with Leung Ting's org.

The main difference between the two is that Williem Chueng teaches what he calls Tradional Wing Chun. The main difference is in the concept of the center line.

TWC teaches(if I remember correctly) the the concept of the center line is totally in regards to your center line. VT, on the other hand, attacks the opponents centerline. Essentially, this means the TWC has more movement, especially off the line of attack rather than going through the attack that common with the VT group.

Now this is just what I have seen in demo's and read. So it is probably more in depth than this but this is what I have seen.

Tony


----------



## DireWolf

> Several years ago I recall reading several articles in Black Belt Magazine and Inside Kung-Fu Magazine in which it was being debated as to who was Grandmaster Yip Man's legitamit successor... William Cheung or Leung Ting. (hope I'm not mispelling either)



Ask just about any of the original 'closed door' students and you will get a different opinion on who is the legitimate successor.  Some are more fanatical than others.  I'm inclined to believe the ones that _don't_ jump around waving their arms and yelling "Look at me everybody!  I have the only *true* Wing Chun!".

It seems to me that the ones that make the most noise have $$$ in mind more than anything else to offer.

Oh, I'm Tsui Sheng Ting lineage through Jim Fung.


----------



## Angus

> _Originally posted by tmanifold _
> 
> *Most of the problems with the Leung Ting group came in the form of Emin Boztepe. He is pretty much a thug. He jumped Williem Chueng at a demo. He has since split with Leung Ting's org.
> 
> *



I've heard about that incident, but what exactly happened when he jumped him? The only details I've heard so far are "he jumped him", and nobody seems to know more. Would you be able to fill me in, please? 

I've heard a lot about Emin Boztepe challenging a lot of big names, and not only those in WC/VT. It's a shame, really, because it gave both him and his former and current organization a bad name, in my opinion. He may be very good, but I don't agree with his actions.


----------



## theneuhauser

on a similar note, here in arizona, leung ting's 4th level student is Keith Sonnenberg. Does anyone know anything about mr. sonnenberg?


----------



## tmanifold

> _Originally posted by Angus _
> 
> *I've heard about that incident, but what exactly happened when he jumped him? The only details I've heard so far are "he jumped him", and nobody seems to know more. Would you be able to fill me in, please?
> 
> I've heard a lot about Emin Boztepe challenging a lot of big names, and not only those in WC/VT. It's a shame, really, because it gave both him and his former and current organization a bad name, in my opinion. He may be very good, but I don't agree with his actions. *



Boztepe came up to Chueng at a demo and challenged him. Chueng said no because he was not of his rank. I guess that is a chinese custom regarding challenges. Boztepe persisted so chueng said, sure after the demo. 

Chueng changed in to his kung fu slippers then procceeded with the demo. During the demo Emin charged him and after a couple seconds Chueng slipped/ was takendown and Boztepe tried to punch him. Chueng parries almost all of them. That was where the video ended, so I don't know any more than that.

Tony


----------



## Kong

I saw that video with Cheung and Emin rolling around on the floor, not very impressive. But I guess the circumstances would have alot to do with the quality of the fight, I mean if Cheung really got jumped from behind while giving his demo, very foul play indeed. Also the video clip (I assume we`ve seen the same one from the internet) ends abruptly, and you don`t really see how it ends. Anybody knows if there ever was, or is going to be, a "rematch" considering the amount of controversy this footage started and the fact a challenge was issued in the first place?


----------



## Kong

> I've heard a lot about Emin Boztepe challenging a lot of big names, and not only those in WC/VT.


Has anything ever come out of these challenges? If that Cheung video is representative of his skill level, it would seem to me like he could run into some serious trouble going around issuing challenges left and right!


----------



## jongman

Personally I don't like to go in to all this WC vs WT/VT subject. To me it is all wing chun and leave it at that.  I have been to Hong Kong and seen LT's school and it looked much the same as our 'traditional' wing chun anyway. I also visited Tsui Sheng Tin's house where he was teaching back then and his students were quite good too. Everyone has there own wing chun and I guess the ones who want to create a large following call themselves 'closed door' disciples for this reason. I tend to believe that William Cheung learnt his combat wing chun on the mainland from a master of 'Hung suen' wing chun but I doubt hem will talk about it as he would like to keep this to himself. In the book 'Complete Wing Chun' Sifu Garret Gee's hung suen looks very much the same as traditional wing chun with the high bong sao elbow and the stances etc. but will we ever know the real background of anybody?
the main difference I can see between WC and VT is the footwork and stepping. As far as centerline/central line goes that's another matter. There are differences in the chum kil and bil jee forms as well as the dummy sets but I think the principles of both systems are the same.


http://redjunk.net


----------



## theneuhauser

whos idea was it to trademark a spelling for a translated term anyways?
seems ridiculous to me.


----------



## tmanifold

VT WC TWC it is all good. The problem was mainly with Boztepe and his attitude. Most of the main Org are run by Yip Man's senior students (assuming the YIP Man lineage). I imagine they are all good.

Tony


----------



## celtic bhoy

As I'm lead to believe, years ago there was insults flying between William Cheung and Leung Ting. I believe it was an argument over lineage and autheticity. I also believe Keith Kernspecht may have been involved somewhere, on the side of Leung Ting.

Anyway it is believed that Emin Boztepe decided to defend Leung Ting's honour (?) by jumping William Cheung at a demo.

This question of honour has since proved laughable, as only last month Boztepe was in a national martial arts magazine rubbishing Kernspecht's and Leung Ting's morals and methods.


----------



## Cthulhu

From what I recall when this was brought up on RMA years ago...

William Cheung was doing a demo/seminar in Germany.  Apparently, VT has a large following in Germany, so a lot of Leung Ting's people were there.  At some point during the demo, Emin Boztepe (backed by some of his cronies) challenged Cheung.  Cheung told him he didn't have to answer his challenge, since Cheung was Boztepe's senior (in a lot of traditional Chinese systems, juniors *never* challenge seniors), but he would oblige him after his obligations with the demo/seminar were done.  Boztepe didn't like that answer and jumped him.  They both went to the ground, with Boztepe in a sort of half-assed mount position over Cheung.  Many punches were thrown.  Boztepe and his cronies ran off.  Cheung got up, finished the demo/seminar, and did a TV interview afterwards, apparently none the worse for wear.

I saw a very poor quality video clip some time back, which I can no longer locate. The whole incident was very quick.  From what I hear, there were two versions of that video clip going around: an unedited version, and a version on one of Boztepe's training videos edited to show him in control the entire time.

Bear in mind, I'm going on my horrible memory from stuff I saw and read about five years ago.

The whole thing is ridiculous, sparked by overblown egos on both sides, and students of Ting and Cheung who have nothing better to do than take part in childish 'my dad can beat up your dad' type arguments. 

Cthulhu


----------



## Brother John

> The whole thing is ridiculous, sparked by overblown egos on both sides, and students of Ting and Cheung who have nothing better to do than take part in childish 'my dad can beat up your dad' type arguments.


That says it so well. 

Ridiculous
overblown egos
Nothing better to do...

Those three things have spoild many a good name in time.

Your Brother
John


----------



## SRyuFighter

I believe that we discussed this on http://www.bulshido.us a few weeks ago. You can go there and do a search. There is a member there that knew a lot about the subject. I believe his name was kungfoolss.


----------



## Phil Elmore

The entity calling itself "Kungfoolss" is quite possibly one of the most ignorant creatures ever to nibble at the fringes of the online martial arts community.  He certainly is not someone to whom you should go for information on any topic relating to the martial arts.  I wouldn't even consider him a useful source of information on his chosen art (Jerry Petersen's S.C.A.R.S.), as he almost never answers direct questions with anything but haughty pretense and intellectual evasions.

http://www.philelmore.com/hate/kungfoolss.htm


----------



## yilisifu

As far as the legitimate hier to the art, I believe it went to Yip Man's eldest son (Leung Ting and Wm. Cheung seem to have forgotten about this traditional line of succession).  I believe he is now deceased (having taught very few people) and his brother inherited the art (legitimately), but he won't teach.


----------



## SRyuFighter

Lol well kungfoolss did post something about that a few weeks ago. Just trying to help out.


----------



## bart

Hey All,

Until the early 90's the West pretty much thought that all Wing Chun came through Yip Man. When he died it was unclear who was his successor as the claim was voiced by more than one individual. The William Cheung fight with Boztepe was short. Boztepe was 17 at the time. And the fight was an attack from behind. It's my understanding that Cheung was also jet lagged and sick as well having just flown in from Australia to Germany that day. There's sound to the video and it seemed to me like neither was speaking the same language either, German vs English (Australian English). It was a short fight and you used to be able to see it on Leung Ting's site or some site linked to it.

In the early 90's several other branches of Wing Chun came to be known and their legitimacy was unquestionable. Their histories went back hundreds of years. Complete with pictures and names of students. So the whole Yip Man successor thing died down. The battle for legitimacy between them all has calmed down.

I live in LA and so does Boztepe. I fought one of his guys at the Dog Brothers in 2000 and his student was pretty good. He was also a very nice guy. The Wing Chun community has become much more friendly to the different branches of Wing Chun since other styles came into the mainstream. This is for the better.

The principles of Wing Chun are pretty much the same, no matter what style. The difference lies in training methodology and in the techniques in the forms. Some of the stances and transitions are very different in the forms between WC and VT. I think this is where the Center/Central Line divergence comes from. In one style, the Gu Lao style of Wing Chun, they don't use the forms at all but rather postures instead.


----------



## jazkiljok

> _Originally posted by bart _
> *Hey All,
> 
> The William Cheung fight with Boztepe was short. Boztepe was 17 at the time. And the fight was an attack from behind. It's my understanding that Cheung was also jet lagged and sick as well having just flown in from Australia to Germany that day. There's sound to the video and it seemed to me like neither was speaking the same language either, German vs English (Australian English). It was a short fight and you used to be able to see it on Leung Ting's site or some site linked to it.
> 
> *



saw the clip too. it can be found still on the net. looked like two drunks going at it. clumsy and hapless is how'd you describe it.

Botzepe gets a bad headlock on Cheung and throws some weak looking punches- they flop to the ground- Botzepe throws a few more weak punches- cheung kicks around with no apparent defense ---it's over. i'm sure Yipman would have been proud.

Cheung in interview said that he was caught off guard, that he was jumped from behind-- i'm sure all true- I guess he learned how the rest of us feel when we get in it on the street.

peace.



:asian:


----------



## Phil Elmore

One neat feature of the tape is the fact that William Cheung tries repeatedly to hook a leg up over Emin, a maneuver that is perfectly logical given the situation he was in.  He's wearing socks only, though, if I remember correctly -- and so he can't get any traction on the gymnasium floor each time he tries.

It's a great lesson about the effects of terrain on a fight.


----------



## Cruentus

How can I get or see a copy of this clip?:asian:


----------



## jazkiljok

> _Originally posted by PAUL _
> *How can I get or see a copy of this clip?:asian: *



http://www.bullshido.us/

think it's still there for download - can't remember if it's long or short version.


----------



## Cruentus

That's kind of funny, actually. I don't know either guy, so I'm not slamming them personally, but that tape does sort of make them both look like crap.


----------



## arnisador

*PAUL*, where exactly on that site is it?


----------



## Cruentus

It's on the left hand side, "Top 5 Downloads" right on the front page, if you scroll down a bit.


----------



## KennethKu

I agree with one of the posters here.  YipMan must be very proud.  *sigh*


----------



## Cthulhu

Long ago, I saw a slightly longer version of that video that actually showed Boztepe and Cheung before they got into a clinch, which is where the bullshido video starts.  Haven't been able to locate it since.  It also had slightly better quality, such that you could easily tell the two apart.

Cthulhu


----------



## moromoro

where can i get this video of boztepe and cheng, also what about YIP MAN son he also co wrote a book with ting i think the wooden dummy techniques, isnt he the real successor?


----------



## Phil Elmore

It's not a question of who is the "real" successor or not.  Yip Man taught two of his sons, if I remember correctly, Yip Chun being one of them.  When seeking a teacher you can learn from anyone who learned the system from someone else;  the question is, in which lineage do you prefer to train?  There are differences from lineage to lineage.  Harping on the politics helps no one, however.


----------



## moromoro

so its not like the japanese systems where there would be a appointed successor?


----------



## Phil Elmore

You're not going to find two people who agree on one "correct" lineage, no.


----------



## WTJune

so.. I'm from LT Wing Tsun linage (here in Austria) and i also think this fight was stupid. From what I've read on Kungfumagazins forum there have been diffrent versions of the story - about who challanged who. But who cares - i think all Wing Chunnnners should help each others and friendly cross hands (do you say like this in english). About cheung and boztempe: from what i've heared both are very good, but what you see on the vid is ridiculous and and the fight was a defamation for all wing chun.

just my 2 cents...


ciao


June
http://www.mp3.com/misbegotten


----------



## Hot Sauce

There are a couple of versions of what happened. The video of the fight doesn't show how the fight beginns so there is no ultimate truth here. Anyway here is another version of what happened:

William Cheung challenged everyone to duel him anytime, anywhere. He also insulted a couple of dead people including the late Bruce Lee. When he insulted Leung Ting, Boztepe decided to visit Cheung when he was in Germany to hold a seminar. Boztepe went there with a few other WT practitioners and said something like " ....I accept you challenge" while showing the magazine where open challange was written to Cheung and then  counted to three and started to fight.

I've heard that Cheung's story has changed a couple of times, first he was attacked from behind, then it changed to that he was wearing slippy shoes and then he didn't want to fight.


----------



## Hot Sauce

I found this on another forum...



> I must say I still think that he got what he asked for...
> 
> 
> In reply of the William Cheung Interview Feb 1996 Mitcham Kwoon.
> 
> The following letter appears in Martial Arts Magazines
> 
> 
> VING TSUN ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION LTD
> 3, Nullah Rd., 2C/fl., Kowloon,
> Hong Kong Tel 3-816044
> 
> Dear Sir,
> 
> RE: Point Three of the minutes of the 11th General Meeting
> 
> Recently we have received many letters and complaints about a person
> called William Cheung who has distorted many affairs with ulterior motive.
> As the board of directors of the Ving Tsun Athletic Association -- the
> general association of the WHOLE Ving Tsun (Wing Tsun / Wing Chun) system,
> which was founded by the late Grandmaster Yip Man and most of his senior
> students since 1976, we have the responsibility to clarify the following
> points:
> 
> 1/ William Cheung has NEVER been regarded by anyone of his fellow-students
> as the grandmaster or the leader of the whole Wing Chun Clan.
> 
> 2/ NOBODY is recognized as the so-called "No 1 student of Grandmaster
> Yip Man" and we have NEVER heard of William Cheung as the "No. 1 Fighter
> of the Wing Chun Style".
> 
> 3/ "Footwork" in the Wing Chun System is regarded as a most advanced
> technique. We do not deny that some of the students of Grandmaster
> Yip Man did not learn the whole system, but it is NOT TRUE that
> William Cheung is the ONLY person to have ever learnt the entire
> Wing Chun System" as what he announced in his advertisement.
> 
> 4/ There have NEVER been any techniques in our system called "DIM-MAK" or
> "Disabling Pressure Points", NOR any so-called "Missing Techniques" since
> the creation of the Wing Chun System by Ng Mui.
> 
> 5/ When Grandmaster Yip Man taught the techniques to his students he asked
> NO-ONE "to take an oath not to reveal the secret to anyone during his life
> time." He taught according to the potential of his students, teaching
> the most advanced techniques to the most talented ones.
> 
> In the mid of 50's there had been a kid called William Cheung who had studied
> in Grandmaster Yip Man's school for a few years intermittently and left
> Hong Kong when he was 18 years old, and since then had become isolated from
> his instructor and all the other fellow-students. During his short training
> he surely gained the wrong impression in thinking that Grandmaster Yip Man
> never taught the advanced techniques to students other than himself. And yet
> we do not know how much William Cheung really learned himself.
> 
> It is regrettable that his lies have gone so far (i.e he told the
> reporters that Grandmaster Yip Man had taught only him the so-called
> "traditional Wing Chun", but had taught all his other students the
> "modified Wing Chun").
> 
> However, any average person could easily analyze his techniques and see
> this statement must be a lie. It is unthinkable that Grandmaster Yip Man
> would choose to cheat all the students except one impudent kid, who actually
> had little respect for him!
> 
> We feel sorry to have such an ignorant person in out clan, We want
> to establish our position: we have NEVER AGREED with his Crazy
> self-promotion, though we do understand his motive in casting himself as the
> "Superman" in the William Cheung's Wing Chun System.
> 
> Yours faithfully,
> 
> The Board Of Directors and Attendance in the meeting of clarification
> the distored affairs.
> 
> Wong Shun Leung (Chairman)
> Leung Ting (Vice Chairman)
> Tong Chao Chi (Vice Chairman)
> Lok Yiu (President)
> Yip Ching (Vice President)
> Ho Kam Ming (Vice President)
> Siu Yuk Man (Secretary)
> Chan Tak Chiu (Treasurer)
> Tsui Sheung Tim (Membership Management)
> Koo Sang (Membership Management)
> Lee Wai Chi (Public Relation)
> Victor Kan (attendance)
> Yip Chun (attendance)
> 
> 
> 
> William Cheung's response to a letter from the
> leading masters of Wing Chun. This version comes from Australasian fighting Arts
> Vol 10 nr 3.
> 
> 
> ********************************************************************
> 
> 
> Firstly, I want to point out that the statement by the Ving Tsun Athletic
> Association in their letter that the "the association was founded by the late
> grandmaster Yip Man and most of his senior student since 1976" is not true,
> because Yip Man died in 1971. So he couldn't have founded the Ving Tsun
> Athletic Association in 1976 as claimed.
> I shall attempt to answer their letter point by point:
> (1) I am the leader of the Traditional Wing Chun because I am the only person
> who inherited the whole Traditional system of Wing Chun. Furthermore, I also
> know the modified version thoroughly, and know that it is inferior to the
> Traditional system. I therefore proclaim myself the Grandmaster of the
> Traditional Wing Chun Kung Fu. If anyone does not think so, he can come and
> see me and I will be more than too pleased to show him.
> (2) I was the only person that Grandmaster Yip Man chose to carry on the
> whole Traditional Wing Chun system. I am the best fighter in the Wing Chun
> Style. This was acknowledged by the late Bruce Lee, and recognized by many
> famous masters of other styles. I anyone needs proof, I would only be too
> pleased to oblige.
> (3) Nobody - I say nobody - was taught the traditional Wing Chun footwork but
> me. I Leung Ting and company knew it, they would be showing their students. It
> is like the case of the Bil Jee form. Nobody knew the proper form except me
> and that is why they have been telling people that the Bil Jee form was too
> dangerous even to show it; in order to cover up the fact that they don't know
> it. I was the first WEing Chun master to put Bil Jee in a book so that
> everyone can learn the correct version.
> (4)Dim Mak or disabling Pressure Point Techniques was passed on to me, along
> with the whole Traditional system of Wing Chun. If you have read my article on
> the subject you might understand how it works. However, ther is no medicine for
> ignorance; Leung Ting and company deny the existence because they don't know
> it. At least this time they admit their ignorance. My book on Dim Mak, or
> Disabling Pressure Point Techniques, will be on the market soon. Keep your
> eyes open. In china there is a Kung Fu monk who could stand upside down on one
> or two hands. Some people can break a half dozen inch boards with a punch.
> Maybe there are people who can stand on a dozen eggs. I can stand on two
> without breaking them. All these can be called tricks if you like, but the
> fact is that I am still "the best Wing Chun Fighter". I dare anyone to prove
> otherwise.
> (5) It is irrelevant to argue whether Yip Man had made be take an oath before
> he taught me the complete Traditional Wing Chun System, because no-one else
> was privileged to witness it. The fact is, that after 36 years of training in
> Wing Chun, I have the confidence to say that I am the most knowledgeable
> master in the Wing Chun System and I am the best fighter, and I am willing to
> prove it to them at any time, anywhere. Unlike Leung Ting and company, as
> shown in the photo, you only have to take one look at them to realize that
> none of them look that part of martial artists. I could safely say that none
> of them have done any hard training in recent years. They certainly don't look
> very impressive!
> In the 50's I was a kid . . . so was Bruce Lee . . . full of enthusiasm and
> energy. We learned Wing Chun together and we were determined to make a name
> for Wing Chun and ourselves. And we did. In the 50's Leung Ting was still "in
> his diapers". He didn't learn Wing Chun until the 1960's from Leung Chun,(Yip
> Man's student) of his own admission. He is one generation behind Bruce and me.
> However, according to the article published in "Secrets of Kung Fu" Vol 2
> 1977, hundred of Kung Fu masters in Hong Kong - including Leung Chun, Yip
> Shun, Tsui Sheng tin, and Wong Shun Leung - denounced Leung Ting in very
> strong terms (I have enclosed copies) Leung Shun was reportedly saying that
> Leung Ting wasn't learning from him, but from his student Jah Bak. This makes
> Leung Ting two generation behind Bruce Lee and I.
> And Leung Ting's claim that he was Yip Man's closed door student is on what
> grounds? In the 60's, Yip Man was a heavy drug user, and did not enjoy very
> good health. There was no way that Yip Man could have taught anyone in that
> state of health. Even his own sons, Yip Chun and Yip Ching, who came to Hong
> Kong in the 1960's, had to be content to train with Yip Man's senior students.
> Wing Chun is a system which was developed for one to be able to master in
> three to four years. Grandmaster Yip Man, from age of twelve to sixteen,
> learned four years part time the modified version of Wing Chun with Chan Wah
> Shun and, from age 17, he learned 2 years traditional Wing Chun from Leung Buk
> (Leung Jung's son) in Hong Kong. Wong Shun Leung only learned modified Wing
> Chun for three years part time and he began teaching in early 1955. Loh Liu
> probably started teaching after only 2 years part time training in the
> modified version.
> I studied Wing Chun for 4 and one half years part time in the modified
> version, and then 2 and one half years full time in the traditional version,
> when I was living with Yip Man. I learned the modified version as well as the
> traditional version. After I completed my learning, I have continued to
> practice for a further 28 years, and I still practice daily.
> From these factors you can see that I am the most qualified practitioner in
> both modified and traditional versions of Wing Chun Kung Fu. I proclaim myself
> the most knowledgeable master and the best fighter in the whole Wing Chun
> style.
> I would like to close off with a very famous Chinese proverb : "Practicing
> Kung Fu is like paddling upstream - if you don't go forward, you must go
> backward, and seldom you stay in the same spot". It is no surprise to find the
> whole group in the printed photo appear to have gone so far backward that I
> would be ashamed to be associated with them.
> 
> William Cheung
> Grandmaster
> 
> **************************************************************************
> 
> (The photo he refers to has in it Leung Ting, Wong Shun Leung, Tong Chao Chi,
> Lok Yiu, Yip Ching, Ho Kam Ming, Siu Yuk Man, Chan Tak Chiu, Tsui Shun Tin,
> Lee Wai Chi, Victor Kan, and Yip Chun. He also supplied a photo of himself
> as a child in the same room as Yip Man)


----------



## The Mark

To the best of my knowledge, from talking with many WC masters and sudents of various lineages, Yip Man did not declare a successor. I have heard his intent was for his sons to take over but nothing formal was ever proclaimed.

Several people claim they were told by Yip Man they were the ones. Maybe he did tell them. He was known to have a sense of humor, and not always a nice one.

I believe if he were to have delcared a successor it would have been the sons or someone that studied with him for a long time and/or understood the art the best-to Yip Man's standards not ours or other students.

Some good posts here. Glad to see it hasn't started a flame war and people are discussing a touchy subject with intelligence.

Mark



			
				Hot Sauce said:
			
		

> I found this on another forum...


----------



## someguy

I think its kind of funnny to fight over who is the succesor.   Kind of forgets about the other liniages of Wing Chun doesn't it.  I don't think i speelled have of the words I typed right but I got to dash so oh well.


----------



## limubai2000

First I want to say thanks for this forum.  

Second I want to agree that yes we are all Wing Chun'ers and this bickering between the students of Yip Man (and their students) is stupid.

I had just recently signed up for the IWCA forum without knowing about this disupte. I did this to answer someone's question about the students of traditional wing chun (myself) doing the circular step at the beginning of our Shil Nim Tao.  I kindly replied what style I studied and my masters name and told them I did not know why we did that and further didn't know there was a different method.  (I have only been studying for 6 months).  I also indicated that is was very cool that Grandmaster Cheung made the cover of Black Belt this month.  

This person I replied to asked for more information so I posted the link to Cheung's Better Life website and indicated that the only circular foot motion I have studied in our style was the upward circular leg sweep (aside from footwork) and I didn't know if the circular step in the beginning of our form was used for anything else.  

Well I returned to that forum today and they had deleted my second post and brazenly posted this - 

go to a william cheung website or message board for info on him. 

sorry, but TJF (administrator) has clearly stated many times lately not to discuss other masters and put up links regarding them. 

sorry to be harsh but drop the subject of william cheung in personal terms. 

---
Then locked the thread so it could not added too.  I am assuming TJF is Master Jim Fung.  

I was none to happy about this as I was taught from the beginning to show respect to all other arts and masters and to realize that there is not an "ultimate martial art".   Now after reading this thread I realize why this action may have been taken and it makes me less happy.  Can't we all just get along?  

Just because I am a student of Traditional Wing Chun (more because of my location than choice) I see no reason I should not be able to communicate and exchange information with members of other lineages (and other arts).  This is also what I was taught from my Sifu.  We practice in the same space as a group of jujitsu folks and some kempo folks and never have had any problems from what I understand.  There is even some cross-teaching between the sifu, sensai, and jujitsu instructors.  Maybe I am just lucky to have an enviroment like this?

Needless to say I was happy to find this forum with a smart group of folks who can discuss these things intelligently.


----------



## Jam_master

Kong said:
			
		

> I saw that video with Cheung and Emin rolling around on the floor, not very impressive. But I guess the circumstances would have alot to do with the quality of the fight, I mean if Cheung really got jumped from behind while giving his demo, very foul play indeed. Also the video clip (I assume we`ve seen the same one from the internet) ends abruptly, and you don`t really see how it ends. Anybody knows if there ever was, or is going to be, a "rematch" considering the amount of controversy this footage started and the fact a challenge was issued in the first place?


 It doesn't show any beginning or end, and I doubt if anyone is ever going to. Emin and his people have made sure of that since they went to the Demo specifically to set Sifu Cheung up. They had their camera's ready!!!


----------



## bcbernam777

There was no successor named by Yip Man, there are simply students who learnt of Yip man and are now teaching, simple, there where students who learnt off of Yip Man longer than both William Cheung (4 years according to other 1st gens of Yip Man, 6 years according to William Cheung) and Leung Ting (whom at worst it is doubtful he learnt of Yip Man at all, and at best only learnt with Yip Man for 9 months after studying with a 1st gen student of Yip mans). at the end of the day, the successor argument has been around for years and it's only apparant usefullness is that it can be plastered on the back of marketing brochures. My Sifu learnt from yip man, so did many others who dont run around proclaiming themselves to be the successor to Yip Man. The only one who can answer that question is no longer with us, and he did not proclaim a single person as his successor. This argument, is better left alone, as at the end of the day it makes no diffeerence, the only thing that matters is "who can do it" who can make their Wing Chun work in a real and dynamic sense, on the street, the tournament, whatever, wherever, that is the only thing that matters.


----------



## Flash25

bcbernam777 said:
			
		

> and Leung Ting (*whom at worst it is doubtful he learnt of Yip Man at all*, and at best only learnt with Yip Man for 9 months after studying with a 1st gen student of Yip mans).



and how do you know this?


----------



## bcbernam777

Flash25 said:
			
		

> and how do you know this?


My Sifu did study with Yip Man, during the early 50's (of Bruce vintage) and also by Leung tings own admission saying that he studied 9 months with Yip Man also verified in an article written by Kernscphect


----------



## Flash25

If you know that he studied with Yip Man for 9 months, why do you imply that he may not have studied with him at all?


----------



## bcbernam777

Flash25 said:
			
		

> If you know that he studied with Yip Man for 9 months, why do you imply that he may not have studied with him at all?


I dont know that he studied with YM for 9 months, that is Leung Tings claim.


----------



## juntao wing chun

cheung, Leung Ting,Emin Boztepe,moy yat, they all are connected to yipman becuase of wing chun,and im sure everyone of them teach to be a calm and cool person ,but sometimes todays human comes out ,...........


----------



## juntao wing chun

hey some one mite have a problem with me visiting there schools asking for just a day of trainin wich i have done and still do and i enter with repect and maybe Emin Boztepe went there just to fight but people dont know why Emin Boztepe did that to William Cheung and really who gives a care...i dont, ive train with followers of cheung, Leung Ting,Emin Boztepe,moy yat ways of wing chun and some were cool and some were tuff guys and i got good training out of all of them my sifu allways said to keep your training goin out side of class buy "touching different handssssss" and some schools dont want visiters at all .......o'well


----------



## Flying Crane

politics in Wing Chun, like most other martial arts, can get pretty ugly.  Everybody hates everybody.  I don't believe Yip Man left a designated successor.  If he did, it would most likely have been one of his sons.  Meantime, many people trained at his school, and have become instructors in their own right.  Pick one you like, and train with him.  And Yip Man's lineage is not the only wing chun lineage.


----------



## sifupr

Brother John said:
			
		

> . . . . .
> ALSO: Why does Leung Ting use the spelling Ving Tsun?
> is it as simple as the difference between Madarin and Cantonese or what???Your Brother
> John


Hong Kong was a British colony for years. The Brits used the term "water closet" (WC) for toilet. The people at the VTAA didn't want to associate the initials WC for their beloved system so they changed the Romanization to 'VT'. Leung Ting designated his branch with the initials, WT.
When a native Cantonese reader sees the Chinese characters for Wing Chun they will pronounce it "Wing Choon" regardless of what Romanization we Westerners use.  (Mandarin is Yong/Yung Chun)
PR


----------



## mantis

sifupr said:
			
		

> Hong Kong was a British colony for years. The Brits used the term "water closet" (WC) for toilet. The people at the VTAA didn't want to associate the initials WC for their beloved system so they changed the Romanization to 'VT'. Leung Ting designated his branch with the initials, WT.
> When a native Cantonese reader sees the Chinese characters for Wing Chun they will pronounce it "Wing Choon" regardless of what Romanization we Westerners use.  (Mandarin is Yong/Yung Chun)
> PR


is this why?
i thought coz europeans, especially nations who speak dutch mis-pronounce the w and they say it as a "v". 
like Volks wager is pronounced Volks Vagen...
hmmm... interesting
i even thought WC stands for War Craft... i been cheated man


----------



## arnisador

Eh' I'm not sure they "mis-pronounce" it...maybe they've got it right!


----------



## ed-swckf

The reason leung ting in particular spells it different is because he actually copyrighted that particular spelling in order to make a marketable definition of his brand of the art.


----------



## Shaolin Bushido

Kong said:
			
		

> I saw that video with Cheung and Emin rolling around on the floor, not very impressive. But I guess the circumstances would have alot to do with the quality of the fight, I mean if Cheung really got jumped from behind while giving his demo, very foul play indeed. Also the video clip (I assume we`ve seen the same one from the internet) ends abruptly, and you don`t really see how it ends. Anybody knows if there ever was, or is going to be, a "rematch" considering the amount of controversy this footage started and the fact a challenge was issued in the first place?


 
Emin was a young man while William Cheung was pretty old at the time.  That was just an embarassment.


----------



## JAMJTX

And he was not jumped from behind.  Emin asked him if he was ready to fight.  He said yes.


----------



## sifupr

JAMJTX said:
			
		

> And he was not jumped from behind. Emin asked him if he was ready to fight. He said yes.


Not really. People who were there including some of the VT people said William Cheung told him later then was jumped as he turned away. After the incident he continued with the seminar so he wasn't hurt. Think of it like this Cheung was older was teaching and traveling all over the world. He wasn't training to fight. Whereas Emin was training for the attack This has been discussed to death on so many forums and is OLD news. 
PR


----------



## arnisador

Yes, this really is an old story. I think it lives on because there are so few modern stories of masters dueling.


----------



## yipman_sifu

Brother John said:
			
		

> I am not a Wing Chun practitioner, but appreciate the styles practicallity and the skills of it's practitioners.... I just want you to know that I don't intend to stir ill-will by posting this question, it's spawned by curiousity and my desire to fill my gaps of ignorance.
> 
> Several years ago I recall reading several articles in Black Belt Magazine and Inside Kung-Fu Magazine in which it was being debated as to who was Grandmaster Yip Man's legitamit successor... William Cheung or Leung Ting. (hope I'm not mispelling either)
> 
> What ever came of this debate??
> 
> ALSO: Why does Leung Ting use the spelling Ving Tsun?
> is it as simple as the difference between Madarin and Cantonese or what???
> 
> Thanks for helping!
> Your Brother
> John


 
My friend, Leung ting branch is Wing Tsun not Ving Tsun.
Regarding Yipman's successor. I believe that there are masters that are even older and more experienced, although I believe that Master Leung Ting can be given such a title. If you know guys like masres (Leung Sheung, Lok Yiu, Victor Kan), they are also top masters that can be given such title.

Did you forgot master Tsui Seung Tin. Master Yipman admitted once that this disciple had surpassed even his own skill in fighting.
What about the Legend Wong Sheung Leung. In my opinion, He and master Tsui were the real best top students of Yipman.


----------



## jamil08

Good afternoon to all,

    As a former TWC practicioner and a current WT (the correct trademark spelling is not VT for neither Leung Ting or Emin Boztepe-EBMAS) I will like to clarify a few points that I personally deem as an insult and worst of all, biased.  
    There are good and bad personalities in both schools of thought.  I personally beginned my Wing Chun training in the Traditional Wing Chun school which calls itself "The Wing Chun Society."  My experiences there were horrible: the instructor was very racist, he made racial comments at every class I'd attended, took my money for two months and didn't teach me anything (90% of his time was spent in teaching his other students who were not African American) and so I left.  
    But there is another more disturbing notion that bothered me even more: how they ragged on and on about "Emin Boztepe."  And boy, believe me, they hate him with a passion.  I eventually left their school and joined the EMBAS headquarter school in Brooklyn two summers later.  And so far, my experiences there has been fantastic.  From day one, I was made to feel at home.  
    It wasn't the same with the WT school I'd previously attended.  Those guys and girls were more like "what the $^&@& are you doing here? Scram!"  These experiences goes to show that the differences of what I believe to be 'sibling rivalry' derives from the individual schools not the founders.  I believe there are good, respectable, and well mannered TWT schools out there but I haven't found one.  Likewise one the reverse with the EBMAS schools. Every school may not adhere to the same "knights in shining armor philosophy" my EBMAS school does.  
    The other major difference is in terms of philosophical concept and on this one, I must admit to: many EBMAS practicioners feel that their Leung Ting Wing Tsun is better than that of Traditional Wing Chun practioners.  I mean, there is no need to lie about it.  Either TWT guys are doing something wrong or they're trying to build our self confidence because they get punched in the chest and face a lot when our schools come together.  
    Now on account of Emin Boztepe, the guy is NOT a thug.  He is a very very very nice guy.  And the funny thing is, he only mentions the fight he had with Grandmaster William Cheung if a student asks.  He did not "jump" William Cheung as some ill informed TWT practioner mentioned on this site.  Personal words to that individual: go look at the video on youtube.com before you make another biased comment.
    Concerning the centerline theory, both schools believe the same exact thing. It's just that the TWT schools included a "centreline theory."  Both schools target the opponents centerline but the ways of engaging or attacking this line varies amongst the schools.  For instance, Leung Tings schools don't block.  William Cheung schools do, they call it "deflecting the attack."  Concept: the pinball effect.  Leung Tings schools perform footwork that involves pivoting, sliding, circling and a 100/0 triangle stance (back stance).  William Cheung schools are transitional; they prefer steps to pivots and a 50/50 stance that's similar that of a boxer.  
    On the outcome of the whole Leung Ting and William Cheung mess. I've been searching for those answers for some time now and I came to two conclusions. Either somebody is lieing about being Yip Man's student (ever taken notice to the fact that every branch style of Wing Chun in America proclaims Yip Man was their progenator?) or we as humble practioners will never know the truth because our founding fathers won't tell us for sake of promotion and the possibility of losing students.  Guess they are taking this one to the grave fellow brothers and sisters.  Peace.


----------



## geezer

jamil08 said:


> Good afternoon to all,
> 
> ... we as humble practioners will never know the truth because our founding fathers won't tell us for sake of promotion and the possibility of losing students.  Guess they are taking this one to the grave fellow brothers and sisters.  Peace.



In the interests of peace, *let's bury this old thread!*, I've met people from a lot of different WT/WC lineages, and found good people everywhere. The leaders of some of the main lineages have their differences. We, as students or sifus don't have to buy into that crap. Just let it go....


----------



## KamonGuy2

Dear me....
Who is Yip Man's legitimate successor? Who cares? 
Wing chun is so varied and different, all I care about is who is a good teacher, who can hold their own in a fight etc

Cheung vs Boztepe was funny to watch
Cheung (for years) has claimed that his art is 
the traditional art, and has slated other arts as being modified
ALL wing chun has been modified in one way or the other
It truly shows how poor a master is when they have to fight with another master over who is the best or who is right
Boztepe merely went in and shut Cheung up in a very direct way 
I personally applaud that
If a person has a big mouth and claims something  he has to be able to back that up
Whilst I dont condone going into peoples seminars and beating them up, Cheung had literally asked for anyone to prove him wrong (prove that he wasnt the greatest chunner on the planet)

If a student comes to me and says that he has learnt something from another teacher I will look at it and make comments where I can
I will not slate the move, just because it comes from another teacher. Thats just ridiculous

The different spellings are merely to distinguish those styles from others 
(ie if we were all called wing chun it would get pretty confusing) That is why we are called Kamon Wing Chun instead of just Wing Chun

I think this thread has been done to death

You can find numerous clips of all these characters (Leung Ting, William Cheung, Emin Boztepe) on youtube and whilst you should never make judgements based on a video, they will give you an idea of each persons character and style

Peace out


----------



## brocklee

Kamon Guy said:


> I think this thread has been done to death
> 
> Peace out



Nope, people keep adding to it


----------



## K Dries

[]
Just remember,my friend there is good & bad in every art,as to ying&yang,So look at the Art as the art,not the people as the Art.


----------



## K Dries

Kamon Guy said:


> Dear me....
> Who is Yip Man's legitimate successor? Who cares?
> Wing chun is so varied and different, all I care about is who is a good teacher, who can hold their own in a fight etc
> 
> Cheung vs Boztepe was funny to watch
> Cheung (for years) has claimed that his art is
> the traditional art, and has slated other arts as being modified
> ALL wing chun has been modified in one way or the other
> It truly shows how poor a master is when they have to fight with another master over who is the best or who is right
> Boztepe merely went in and shut Cheung up in a very direct way
> I personally applaud that
> If a person has a big mouth and claims something  he has to be able to back that up
> Whilst I dont condone going into peoples seminars and beating them up, Cheung had literally asked for anyone to prove him wrong (prove that he wasnt the greatest chunner on the planet)
> 
> If a student comes to me and says that he has learnt something from another teacher I will look at it and make comments where I can
> I will not slate the move, just because it comes from another teacher. Thats just ridiculous
> 
> The different spellings are merely to distinguish those styles from others
> (ie if we were all called wing chun it would get pretty confusing) That is why we are called Kamon Wing Chun instead of just Wing Chun
> 
> I think this thread has been done to death
> 
> You can find numerous clips of all these characters (Leung Ting, William Cheung, Emin Boztepe) on youtube and whilst you should never make judgements based on a video, they will give you an idea of each persons character and style
> 
> Peace out


Well said, Hope to hear more from you(Cheers)


----------



## Si-Je

I have a question, asked from great ignorance.

Was Yip Man the only master that produced students and masters?  I look at some of these lineage charts in Sifu Fungs book and in Leung Tings, and the tree seems incomplete.  I'm not sure if these guys just died before passing on their knowledge, or if the authors just didn't add their "successors" because it didn't pertain to the lineage of their art.

Like Leung Bik (Leung Jan's son), did he teach anyone?  
Or futher up the tree like Wong Wah Po?  It just ends there, and he was a direct student of Yim Wing Chun's husband.  (I would love to learn from someone who knows what he learned!)  Did he not teach anyone?  Or did Chan Wah Shun ONLY teach Yip Man?

Does everyone wish to have their WC traced back to Yip man because he was so great, well known, or taught the most students in Wing Chun's history at that time?  Or was he the only Master left alive to pass WC/WT on?


----------



## KamonGuy2

Basically, there are numerous wing chun styles out there. Yet in the 50s there were the 'wing chun wars' where numerous schools fought each other (you've probably seen the rooftop fight clips)

Yip Man's students often won these (with people like Bruce Lee, Cheung etc) Many attribute Yip Man to unifying the schools and ending the wars 

But there is no disputing that Yip Man was a great fighter and practitioner of kung fu, hence many people want to be associated under him

Since those times other people like Benny Meng (eeeuuuurrggghhh) have claimed that they follow a different lineage and path

Personally I don't really think any of it matters that much. 

Kevin Chan (my Sifu) trained under Sam Kwok (via Steve Mair), then went and learnt from Ip Chun, then learnt from several other masters. Therefore, it is hard to define his lineage
Some might describe it as Ip Chun - Sam Kwok - Steve Mair - Kevin Chan
But realistically it is more like Ip Chun - Kevin Chan
But at the end of the day, I wouldn't train under a person just because they trained directly under Yip Man

For me, they have to be a good fighter, a good teacher, very good technically and has an open mind. If they have those qualities, i don't care if they were taught from a DVD!!!


----------



## matsu

*But at the end of the day, I wouldn't train under a person just because they trained directly under Yip Man

For me, they have to be a good fighter, a good teacher, very good technically and has an open mind. If they have those qualities, i don't care if they were taught from a DVD!!!*


lmao KM!!!


matsu


----------



## geezer

Si-Je said:


> I have a question, asked from great ignorance.
> 
> Was Yip Man the only master that produced students and masters?  I look at some of these lineage charts in Sifu Fungs book and in Leung Tings, and the tree seems incomplete.  I'm not sure if these guys just died before passing on their knowledge, or if the authors just didn't add their "successors" because it didn't pertain to the lineage of their art.
> 
> Like Leung Bik (Leung Jan's son), did he teach anyone?
> Or futher up the tree like Wong Wah Po?...



An excellent question, but let's hit it on a new thread. I think most of us agree that this one should quietly die.


----------

