Th Great Grand Master?

[Samson]

I just downloaded the fight between grandmaster william cheung and emin boztepe. William Cheung gets beaten up really badly. How comes? He was a direct student of Yip Man , he is a grandmaster and he claims that he was teaching Bruce Lee at his youth. Bruce Lee was calling William Cheung "The Ultimate Fighter". Some people say that he lost the fight with boztepe because his shoes wasnt very compatible with the situation.

What's the truth? Is that guy a real grandmaster or a clown?
Does he really know wing chun? Would you suggest his lineage and style to someone who wants to start wing chun? Is he not the man at 18 years old who beat up 10 men with knives and did not slip. (fact or fiction) or just growing the rice bowl.

Wong Sheung Leung - Myth VS Reality:

A lot of people claim that wong sheung leung was the "king of hands" , and the best wing chun fighter at that time. People claim that he had more than 200 fights , against muay thai practitioners and other kungfu practitioners and he never lost.
Lots of people suggest his style and lineage , and refer to it as the best lineage/wing chun style. Is this true? :)

[t_niehoff]

There is a real lesson to be learned from the Cheung-Boztepe fight, but it's not along the lines of your question. Don't be concerned with repuations or stories or these sorts of things -- be concerned with developing your own skill.

The important lesson from Cheung-Boztepe was: this is what fighting looks like. Funny, but it looked like a playground fight, like a NHB fight, like how most fights look. Because that's the nature of fighting. It's not going to look like chi sao or your contrived san sao or your play sparring -- it's going to look like Cheung-Boztepe and like the MMA/NHB fights. So the important question is: is this what you are preparing for? If not, you'll be unprepared.

[Samson]

Good answer! Thanks

[tug]

Link please?

[Hendrik]

this is what fighting looks like. Funny, but it looked like a playground fight, like a NHB fight, like how most fights look. Because that's the nature of fighting. It's not going to look like chi sao or your contrived san sao or your play sparring

So the important question is: is this what you are preparing for? If not, you'll be unprepared.



Everything is relative.

as how fight looks it is also relative. may be some prefer beating others instead of figthing? similar to the one shown in the clip, the big mama is just beating the other guy.

as for prepare, that also a complex issue, prepare for what? next time, attack a friend while he is standing and ps****ing and see what is prepared? :D

Note: do not try to attack your friend when he is ps****ing. trying it at your own risk!

[Ultimatewingchun]

As William Cheung is my sifu, and as I'm one of his most senior students here in the United States - I find it necessary to respond to this thread (even though I suspect it's just another troll job).

First of all, there's a lot more to that incident than what meets the eye (ie.- the tape was edited); and secondly, as I knew how good he was way before I ever met him, (was told many years earlier by my first wing chun instructor, Moy Yat, - also a direct student of Yip Man - that William Cheung was the best fighter out of all of Yip Man's students)...and as I have come to see first hand over the last 22 years that he really is a true master of the art of wing chun...I'm not that concerned about the tape in question - or how it may or may not have affected William Cheung's reputation in the eyes of some.

All that said, however...Terence does make a good point:

Anybody can slip on a banana peel...or be caught on a slippery floor with thin shoes on...or simply taken by surprise...or perhaps is simply not prepared to do more than punch and kick while standing at a comfortable distance from their opponent - and find themselves on the floor, being pinned down, and then the punches start coming.

Real fights DO often go to the ground...very often, in fact.

So frequent hard sparring - and crosstraining within the clinch and grappling ranges...IS OF THE UTMOST IMPORTANCE, imo.

[Hendrik]

have you p**** on your pant due to some reason? if yes then that is a nature of human. I have done it many many time including one time before the upper management meeting. boy everyone must be notice.

then, after one p**** on one's pant, next time, one learn to not screw up like before.

so? what to talk about when saw others **** on thier pant?
trying to look for a man who never ****ed on his pant?

can you find one? tell me.

[Thaegen]

E. Boztepe his base is Wing Tsun, he was the head of WT in Turky, but he left the WT organisation. Don't know why.
Anyway I would like to see the clip. And what is most important to be good in WT or being a good fighter. I want the last.

[Hendrik]

speaking about WCK and history,

General Chen Kuo-Fan of Qing dynasty, lost most of his army to the Taiping, so, he jump into the river to commit suicide due to the shame, and at that time, one of his shipman caught him and pull him out.

Years later, Chen destroy the Taiping into dust. what a great true general of the Qing Dynasty. is he unbeatable?

[Samson]

E. Boztepe his base is Wing Tsun, he was the head of WT in Turky, but he left the WT organisation. Don't know why.
Anyway I would like to see the clip. And what is most important to be good in WT or being a good fighter. I want the last.
Go to Detroit wingchun.com

[t_niehoff]

When I said that "this is what a fight looks like" I didn't mean that someone could slip on a banana peel (although I suppose that could happen too), I meant that the Cheung-Boztepe fight followed basically the same pattern of most fights -- stand up, to clinch, to ground. Very few fights end standing up. Very few fights end with someone being knocked out while standing (unless it is a sucker punch). Because, it's natural when anyone is being overwhelmed to grab the other guy and clinch to stop being hit -- boxer's do it, NHB fihgters do it, everyone does it. If you knock someone down, you follow them down to finish it (or they'll get back up and you will have lost the advantage).

The reason that the Cheung-Boztepe fight is the laughing stock of WCK -- or more accurately, made WCK such a laughing stock -- is because netiher WCK fighter appeared to be using WCK, at least not how they train it or how they portray it in their articles, videos, etc.. In other words, they talk one thing (do this or that) and end up doing another. In contrast, the Gracies say to do exactly what they do: take him down, mount him, submit him. The walk their talk. They train to fight exactly how they fight. Whereas with Chueng-Boztepe, all the bong, tans, fooks, get to the blind side, etc. went out the window when the fight was on. NonWCK people will ask: if the grandmasters can't use that stuff when they fight, then what's the use of training it?

[Ultimatewingchun]

"When I said that 'this is what a fight looks like' I didn't mean that someone could slip on a banana peel (although I suppose that could happen too)..." (Terence)


FIRST OF ALL, who said that my response was meant to quell any doubts that Terence may have in his head about William Cheung, TWC blindside strategy, or anything else of that nature?


MOST IMPORTANTLY....my post was to respond to Samson - WHO I NOW KNOW IS TROLLING - as the Detroit website he's directed us to belongs to none other than Cedric Grayson (aka...Ali Hamad Rahim). The biggest troll of all.

Need I say more about that?!

As to this:

"The reason that the Cheung-Boztepe fight is the laughing stock of WCK -- or more accurately, made WCK such a laughing stock -- is because neither WCK fighter appeared to be using WCK, at least not how they train it or how they portray it in their articles, videos, etc.. In other words, they talk one thing (do this or that) and end up doing another. In contrast, the Gracies say to do exactly what they do: take him down, mount him, submit him. The walk their talk. They train to fight exactly how they fight. Whereas with Chueng-Boztepe, all the bong, tans, fooks, get to the blind side, etc. went out the window when the fight was on. NonWCK people will ask: if the grandmasters can't use that stuff when they fight, then what's the use of training it?"..... (Terence)

YOU'RE TROLLING TOO, Terence, with that BJJ nut-hugger talk.

Are you going to tell us that you DON'T train tan, bong, fook ???

Oh you're not saying that ???!!!

No...I didn't think you were, counsellor.

[Thaegen]

I just saw the clip and I have no idea what I saw... who was who ....

[Phil Redmond]

Samson, anyone could sneak up on you and blindside you while you're looking away. It's funny how the trolls don't ever fill out their profile info. I wonder why ;)
PR

[Phil Redmond]

Nice try Samson...lol. You're talking about an ambush of a older man who was a seminar circuit and wasn't training personally for fighting by a younger who was training for the ambush.
Let's see, Ali, Royce Gracie, George Foreman, Mike Tyson, and many other fighters have lost fights. Does that menat they can't fight?

Victor, I don't think that post came from Ali's camp. I think it's some one here in Detroit trying to create problems.
Phil

[t_niehoff]

Victor,

You misunderstood my post -- I'm saying this fight is why WCK has become a laughing stock in most fighting circles. You can deny that if it makes you feel better but that is the truth. If you doubt that it has, visit bullshido or the UG. That's simply the way it is. And that's because of what I said, that *nonWCK people* see that these so-called masters have a fight and end up not using WCK (at least how they present it in their videos and articles). It would be like two BJJ BB's that had a fight and ended up trading punches in stand-up, or two boxers have a fight and end up kicking one another! All the nonWCK practitioners see are two "masters" that apparently can't make their art work -- they're not using the techniques they promote, the strategies they promote, or any of the skills they claim to have. And, their reasoning goes, if the "masters" can't make it work, how can the average practitioner? How we answer that question is important. My view is that we can't look to the "masters" and we don't need to look to the "masters."

I'm also saying that the natural course of a fight is stand up to clinch to ground; sometimes that process is very quick, sometimes its slower. And, of course, at anytime in that process, we can get lucky, particularly if we're much better than our opponent, and end it "early." And that process is exactly what happend (stand up to clinch to ground) in the Boztepe-Cheung fight.

[Phil Redmond]

. . . .Is that guy a real grandmaster or a clown?
Does he really know wing chun? . . .
This slanderous post is what is expected on that "other" forum, not here.
I believe slander is against forum rules. Some of us here are intelligent enough to get our points across without slander. It's obvious that some are not.
PR

[anerlich]

Troll judging for Samson - 1.2 out of 10. Only that high because he successfully got the Terence broken record started up again, which is hardly a great accomplishment, since it regularly starts of its own accord anyway and this might have been a coincidence.

This "fight" happened nearly 20 years ago. The other TWC/WT incident nearly ten years ago.

Look to the future, not the past.

[Samson]

We don’t limit ourselves to what has been done, instead we are interested in what could be done. We are constantly looking for better ways, if we find a problem in what we are doing we work to fix it, not ignore as “Not a part of our style”. Science was stuck in the dark ages for a long time because of this sort of thinking, and the Martial Arts should not repeat that mistake. Aristotle was brilliant, but his work has been improved on by many generations of scientists. Many of the old masters where undoubtedly brilliant martial artists as well, and their work has been improved on as well

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Victor...You misunderstood my post -- I'm saying this fight is why WCK has become a laughing stock in most fighting circles. You can deny that if it makes you feel better but that is the truth." (Terence)


NO TERENCE, I think I understood the nature of your post very clearly - and you were trolling TWC, William Cheung, the blindside strategy, Emin Boztepe, WT, and three guys named tan, bong, fook...to name just a few.


.......................

Phil:

As you're there in Detroit, and I'm not....I'll take your word for it about Samson.

[bonetone]

A friend of mine saw me get into a fight and his remarks were that it was like a hockey fight or a fight you would see in high school, and my response was if he thought it was supposed to look like a kung fu movie or what. I can remember all the Wing Chun I used in the fight. It ended up on the ground with clawing, pounding, and biting and blood everywhere, not much Wing Chun in that part of the fight.

Is the story about one of Emin's men tugging down Cheung's trowsers before the fight true? Asking out of curiosity, no disrespect intended.

[Neo]

Is the story about one of Emin's men tugging down Cheung's trowsers before the fight true? Asking out of curiosity, no disrespect intended.

You're kidding right? Next, you'll be asking if they slipped him something in his drink beforehand.... :rolleyes:

[bonetone]

You're kidding right? Next, you'll be asking if they slipped him something in his drink beforehand.... :rolleyes:

No I wasn't kidding, it was a story I've heard and wondered if its true. Did they slip him a mickey finn too? :^)

[Nick Forrer]

*walks in to forum, sees dead horse on ground, sees other forum members laying into it, decides to pick up nearest club and have a go at it*

As has been pointed out:

- The fight *is* edited
- The floor was probably slippy (this IME affects both stand up and ground fighting, making it 'sloppier'. As a thought experiment think of Lewis trying to box on an ice rink (FWIW - i sometimes 'roll' with my training partner on our slippery wooden floor at home - a different experience from a nice tatame with plenty of traction.))
-Prior to the incident William cheung made a serious of *ill advised* statements which he probably regrets now.
- Emin said that his intention was not to hurt William Cheung per se but just to humiliate him (hence maybe the tactics he uses).
- Although I cant speak for william cheung (having never met him) from my experience with Emin I would say he is very good at wing chun (a lot better than that clip makes out).

[KPM]

Troll judging for Samson - 1.2 out of 10. Only that high because he successfully got the Terence broken record started up again, which is hardly a great accomplishment, since it regularly starts of its own accord anyway and this might have been a coincidence.



You crack me up Andrew! :D That statement is pure poetry! :p

Keith

[Samson]

Hi to all,
Sami here, just using bro's username.
Just like to say aswell that i take my hat of to wingchun. Even though in many of my fights you might not see anything resembling it, i say the sensitivity drills, and all the moves helped my hands learn to think for themselves. Any other techniques that were explained to me from other styles i as able to get a better understanding of the angles and momentum.
I was able to enter Fights with grappling involved with no grappling backround. It taught me improv,lol

by the way as for the delta lineage. My sifu had a number of different teachers and made some mods. to it. Not to say classical or any other is more or less, or that anystyle is better than another. I would say that each serves different people in different ways.
Enjoy training,
BGOOD Goes to show you from a pro, more than Wing Chun just needed to fight
(another Wing Chun Guy stepped out of the dark ages)

[Samson]

What I would like to ask is how come William Cheung's stories change as time goes by? Originally the fight on the boat he was against 3 or 4 people, then it changed into 9 and the last time he said it was against 27 (YES! 27) seamen! This was in one of Australian martial arts magazines. Come on, who is really going to take on and defeat 27 men who are hell bent on doing serious injury to you? Any takers?

In the book, "Bruce Lee: Between wing chun and jkd" there are soem stories about William Cheung. In the following book by the author Jesse Glover, he actually states that some of the exploits mentioned were actually concerning Wong Shun Leung and not William Cheung. In fact, in Hong Kong Wong Shun Leung was considered the fighter of the wing chun clan and was respected as such up until his death.

[Samson]

Edmond Lee who was teaching in Australia before passing away was actually on the boat and he said that it was 3-5 people. This was published in "Australasian Fighting Arts" as well and William never corrected him. He said that he was stabbed in the incident and he did not even know that he had been stabbed until he layed on his bed and found that a knife was embedded in his back all the way to the hilt!
Look even after the incident with Emin Boztepe, William couldnt get his story straight.
For example, in black belt magazine he said that when grappling with Boztepe on the ground he felt padding underneath his kung fu jacket! Obviously he was interviewed before he realized that there was a video going to be sold around the world of the fight and that Boztep was wearing a thin t-shirt.

In Australian Penthouse magazine (which has some fine material by the way), he said that he had been recently challenged in Germany and when he turned around to fight the person challenging him, he saw that the person was 'padded from head to toe'!

These two examples are just two examples of lies told about the fight in Germany and cast shadows of doubt over other stories. Some people want to believe

[TomasWTUK]

This thread is pointless.

Really, what do you hope to acheive by dragging up this old sh1te; is it helping you become better at WT/WC/VT whatever?

As a "family" (albeit somewhat fragmented at times), we really should be looking to the future to grow as a whole and heal rifts, not thrash the same dull issues again and again.

ZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzz.........

[Ultimatewingchun]

It's pointless because this clown who calls himself "Samson" (of all things...LOL) is a total friggin' troll, hiding in the troll shadows, talkin' 5hit about William Cheung...who was Yip Man's best fighter in his day (and that includes Wong Shun Leung).

What else is new?

There are a lot of sicko jealous people out there...

and especially a few I can think of who happen to be living in Detroit; and from what I can gather, are probably seeing a whole TEAM of psychiatrists.

Later for this garbage thread.

[Samson]

Hiding no, from Detroit no, Hiding behind a phoney Grandmaster Yes!

[sihing]

Victor,

You misunderstood my post -- I'm saying this fight is why WCK has become a laughing stock in most fighting circles. You can deny that if it makes you feel better but that is the truth. If you doubt that it has, visit bullshido or the UG. That's simply the way it is. And that's because of what I said, that *nonWCK people* see that these so-called masters have a fight and end up not using WCK (at least how they present it in their videos and articles). It would be like two BJJ BB's that had a fight and ended up trading punches in stand-up, or two boxers have a fight and end up kicking one another! All the nonWCK practitioners see are two "masters" that apparently can't make their art work -- they're not using the techniques they promote, the strategies they promote, or any of the skills they claim to have. And, their reasoning goes, if the "masters" can't make it work, how can the average practitioner? How we answer that question is important. My view is that we can't look to the "masters" and we don't need to look to the "masters."

I'm also saying that the natural course of a fight is stand up to clinch to ground; sometimes that process is very quick, sometimes its slower. And, of course, at anytime in that process, we can get lucky, particularly if we're much better than our opponent, and end it "early." And that process is exactly what happend (stand up to clinch to ground) in the Boztepe-Cheung fight.

Interesting...A few months ago I saw a NHB fight video of a BJJ black belt vs. a Hapkido Black Belt, to which the Hapkido guy took apart the BJJ guy in about 1 1/2 minutes into the first round. So, using your reasoning Terence, I can say IMO that BJJ is the laughing stock of the Martial Arts also, although I wouldn't, because I know different, and am not stupid enough to judge a Martial Art on one encounter between two people, even though both of these people are skilled in that particular Art.

I guess Bruce was full of sh!t when he said what he said about Cheung then, funny isn't it that even months before his death he was still comparing himself to the man, lol.

As for Boztepe I agree with Nick, he does have great skill and natural physical attributes in his chosen WT style.

Neither men are unbeatable, but both pose great barriers to anyone engaging them in combat.

As for Boztepe's challenge match, what would you do when in a foreign land for the first time, alone & unaware of the laws and customs, and someone challenges you, with 4-8 guys backing him up? Maybe passive and non resistent, instead of aggressive with a killer attitude? From what I understand of the situation, Cheung agreed to the challenge and was willing to fight him after the seminar. Also, if the beating was so bad, lol, then how was it possible for the seminar to continue on immediately after the incident took place? It was definitely a dark time for WC, from BOTH camps IMO. Cheung was asking for it, with his c0cky nature and published challenges in the magazines, and Boztepe showed all how big his ego was and lack of self control with his actions, and I'm sure both have learned their lessons since then.


James

[anerlich]

Edmond Lee who was teaching in Australia before passing away was actually on the boat and he said that it was 3-5 people. This was published in "Australasian Fighting Arts" as well and William never corrected him. He said that he was stabbed in the incident and he did not even know that he had been stabbed until he layed on his bed and found that a knife was embedded in his back all the way to the hilt!

Several corrections here.

1. You put Great Grandmaster in the thread title. The only person egotistical enough in modern times to claim such a title is Leung Ting, presumably because Keith Kernspecht was due for the Grandmaster title, and they couldn't both be seen to be on the same level, though to this date Keith hasn't made it to "Master of Almightiness". Just as well, since they'd probably have to come up with something even more hifalutin for Leung Ting, like "Supreme Master of Hyperdimensional Wizardry" (copyright anerlich 2005).

2. Several other people, including Greg Tsoi also claimed to be on the boat, and the article I saw from AFA, shown to me by Sifu David Crook of Canberra, was by him, not Edmu(o)nd Lee. I'm surprised the boat didn't sink in the South China Sea en route, since it was so overloaded with WC practitioners who all claim to have witnessed the fight.

It was basically about a teenager who effectively fought off four tough seamen - according to some made somewhat easier by the narrow gangways on a ship, which made it easier for Cheung to fight them one at a time and impossible for the group to outflank him. Still quite a remarkable achievement, rather better than a flunky for Ting and Kernspecht in his prime, backed up by a crowd of stooges, setting up and setting upon a 46 year old man and still failing to cause him any significant damage.

Emin admitted in a recent article in Australasian Blitz (see, I can quote sources too!) that he ambushed Cheung on Ting and Kernspecht's orders, and apologised for doing so.

The 27 adversaries, knife in the back, etc. came up in a fictionalised account which was the basis for a screenplay and was published in various MA magazines, including Blitz. A lot of intellectually challenged people, apparently including you, Samson, took this as a supposedly truthful claim despite it being clearly identified as a fictionalised account. Sure, Cheung didn't do a lot to dissuade the credulous, but IMO that's their problem. Only a fool would believe that account.


In Australian Penthouse magazine (which has some fine material by the way),

I suggest you stick to drooling over that rather than discoursing with the adults on here in future, especially on subjects which are decades old.

BTW, you better make sure your brother doesn't find out he's using your user name or reading his dirty mags, he might take you into the other sort of WC and give you another "swirly"...


A few months ago I saw a NHB fight video of a BJJ black belt vs. a Hapkido Black Belt

OT, but one of my BJJ acquaintances is a Hapkido BB and school owner who was recently promoted to BJJ purple belt. He is an excellent fighter and competitor.

[cerebus]

In reference to the question about one of Leung Ting's guys pulling down William Cheung's pants just before the Cheung/ Boztepe fight, yes that is true. I had heard the story as well and never knew whether to believe it or not, as I had only seen a very edited version of the fight. Last year someone had posted a longer, unedited (or maybe just less edited) version of that fight clip, and someone does indeed come up behind Cheung and pull down his pants. He quickly pulled them back up and the fight began soon after.

Also, yes, in this clip Cheung does hit Boztepe with a front kick before he ends up on the ground (which I had previously heard from others). I don't know if he would have done better with less slippery shoes or not, but he did obviously slip.

If you search enough on the web, you can probably find the unedited clip. I had no way of saving it and never though to write down the url, so I can't give a link to it though. Sorry.

[Samson]

Well I am gkad you saw the unedited version of the fight, it shows the truth that he was not blindsided as some would say he threw a front kick, so he was ready to fight. My point is why do people follow a man that cannot tell the truth, where's the humility? nobody says he cannot fight (atleast me) This guy has more stories than WALT DISNEY!

[t_niehoff]

Nerlich's comments were spot on.

I might point out that video clip where we saw the older gung fu practitioner "fight off" four or five men. As you may recall, I made a comment when Ernie posted it about how this would someday become a "legend". History repeats itself! ;)

What is IMO beyond dispute is that Cheung "knows WCK", at least in the sense that he has the information to teach it. He also has some fighting skill, as anyone from his "generation" in HK can attest to. Having said that, we need to appreciate that we don't get *our* skill from our instructor, we get it from our **training**. If you don't train like a fighter, you won't be a fighter. What "made" Cheung, Wong, etc. better fighters than the rest of those at the Yip Man school (leaving aside for the moment the question of talent) wasn't that they were close to Yip Man or had secret info or *knew* more, it was that they fought, and by fighting, developed into better fighters. They were among a relatively small bunch that actually *practiced* WCK; the rest were merely theoretical/nonfighters who played WCK. As neither Wong or Chueng (or anyone else for that matter) fought world-class level fighters, it's silly to talk about them being world-class level. But they were clearly heads and shoulders above the WCK "players". As the saying goes, "In the world of the blind, the one-eyed man is king."

[Ultimatewingchun]

Again Terence, you ruined what could have been a perfectly good post with too much hyperbole and troll-type rhetoric...

What am I getting at?

Yes it's true that guys like William, Wong, and Bruce were way ahead of the pack at Yip Man's school (because they actually fought with the wing chun they trained)...

but there were others from that generation (and thereafter) who could definitely fight...Victor Kan, Duncan Leung, Mak Po, Gary Lam, etc.

You're constantly throwing out the baby in your haste to show everybody how worthless the bathwater is...

Why is that, Terence?

Very counter productive, it seems to me.

Unless maybe these tactics are simply your internet rehearsal to try and sway juries to acquit your clients even though their guilty?

Pour on the rhetoric, exaggeration, and attempt self esteem intimidation as a means to convince people to ignore facts that are staring them in the face - so that they'll buy your story lock, stock, and barrel?

It's getting very tired, man...

[sihing]

Nerlich's comments were spot on.

I might point out that video clip where we saw the older gung fu practitioner "fight off" four or five men. As you may recall, I made a comment when Ernie posted it about how this would someday become a "legend". History repeats itself! ;)

What is IMO beyond dispute is that Cheung "knows WCK", at least in the sense that he has the information to teach it. He also has some fighting skill, as anyone from his "generation" in HK can attest to. Having said that, we need to appreciate that we don't get *our* skill from our instructor, we get it from our **training**. If you don't train like a fighter, you won't be a fighter. What "made" Cheung, Wong, etc. better fighters than the rest of those at the Yip Man school (leaving aside for the moment the question of talent) wasn't that they were close to Yip Man or had secret info or *knew* more, it was that they fought, and by fighting, developed into better fighters. They were among a relatively small bunch that actually *practiced* WCK; the rest were merely theoretical/nonfighters who played WCK. As neither Wong or Chueng (or anyone else for that matter) fought world-class level fighters, it's silly to talk about them being world-class level. But they were clearly heads and shoulders above the WCK "players". As the saying goes, "In the world of the blind, the one-eyed man is king."

They fought as teenagers yes (Cheung and Bruce), so you have to take that for what it is (kids in the playground stuff), but others on here have related stories regarding both men of their later fights that were more or less proof of their abilities. At 18 Cheung fought off how many guys on his way to Australia from HK? Although they could only attack him in confined quarters, 3 or 4 at a time, he was at a time in his life where his physical conditioning was high and his knowledge of WC was well developed, he still admitted to getting stab in the back. So any one that can defend themselves against multiple opponents with weapons and talk about it later has skill if you ask me. Ask Andrew Nerlich for more stories as I'm sure his Sifu has plenty. Regarding Bruce we all know lots of stories relating to his skills and abilities, so that is a given. Both men had high quality skills, and if they chose to compete they would have done well (didn't Cheung win the Elimination contests in Hong Kong back in the 50's) IMO. Just because they didn't doesn't mean the skills were not there.

James

[t_niehoff]

Victor,

Read my posts more carefully. I said, "They [Cheung and Wong] were among a relatively *small bunch* that actually *practiced* WCK; the rest were merely theoretical/nonfighters who played WCK." While I didn't name who made up that "small bunch", I clearly indicated that there were others besides Cheung and Wong that did fight -- including my sigung, Hawkins Cheung, who took up karate so that he could spar (he didn't want to fight in the streets and break the law but wanted to fight to develop his skill).

James,

There is no doubt that Cheung and others had some fighting skills; I said as much. We can speculate until the cows come home about what their level was. Fighting is like any athletic activity. We *know* what someone's level is by their accomplishments; in this case, who they beat and how. Cheung never fought any world-class fighters. He fought mainly in the streets, mainly other kids his age. We don't know much about his exploit on the boats. Someone could, for example, say that the gung fu guy on the clip Ernie posted "fought and defeated 5 attackers" but when you see the clip for yourself, you see that while he had some skill, those other guys were really, really bad, and no real damage was done to anyone. It wasn't a BFD. So who really knows about Cheung's boat fight?

Whatever one's fighting skills, they decrease over time if one isn't fighting (as part of their training) to maintain them. In fact, the better one's skill level, the greater the difficulty maintaining them. This is true of any athletic activity. When the fight occured in Cologne, I doubt that Cheung had fought in 20-25 years.

[sihing]

FWIW, Boztepe had to grapple with Cheung, although he was much younger and had trained for the challenge a year in advance I do not think his WC skills back then were a match, now maybe different, but it would be interesting to see the two tango in a stand up only match.

James

[cerebus]

It's pretty funny that this thread gives a prime example of the "exaggeration" that happens with fights.

People are talking about the fight clip with the older guy taking on "4 or 5" guys. Ladies & gents, it was only 3! Don't take my word for it, look it up for yourselves. And this is just with "1st generation" witnesses of the video. You all saw it yourselves, and just recently too.

How many generations has it been since Cheung's fight on the boat? Quite possibly it was only 2 guys about his own size and in a confined area, and the knife "stuck" in his back may have only been a superficial wound.

[Samson]

It's pretty funny that this thread gives a prime example of the "exaggeration" that happens with fights. This is so true just like a fishing story every year the fish caught keeps growing and growing.

People are talking about the fight clip with the older guy taking on "4 or 5" guys. Ladies & gents, it was only 3! Don't take my word for it, look it up for yourselves. And this is just with "1st generation" witnesses of the video. You all saw it yourselves, and just recently too. This is more believable

How many generations has it been since Cheung's fight on the boat? Quite possibly it was only 2 guys about his own size and in a confined area, and the knife "stuck" in his back may have only been a superficial wound.
If everyone Most Wing Chun sites always point to Bruce Lee or The Great William Cheung to promote their school, Bruce quit Wing Chun, and William Cheung probaly only fought 1 or 2 guys on the boat unskilled guys, I think people that keep repeating my Grandmaster caught the biggest fish start to believe their own lies.

[t_niehoff]

Samson,

I can't disagree with you about the marketing of WCK: most of it is complete, utter nonsense. But this is what happens when you have a bunch of folks that have little real skill trying to sell their wares to a bunch of folks that want to play martial artists but don't want to fight -- among other things, you get references to "legends" as proof that "this stuff really works". They don't need to do that in boxing or MT or BJJ or whatever since anyone can see it work for themselves.

James,

That Boztepe took Chueng outside of Cheung's game is just smart fighting. If I fight another WCK guy, my strategy would probably be to take him down off the bat even if I think my WCK skills are better. Why? Because he'll be able to put up a fight on his feet but be helpless on the ground, so it's easier and safer to just take him down. If I fight with a BJJ practitioner, my strategy would probably be to "stall and brawl" since it would be easier and safer for me to keep the fight off the ground.

[AmanuJRY]

In reading this thread, I had an epiphany...the fight between Boztepe and Cheung...has...absolutly no bearing on my martial development. Wow, now I can just go train without that heavy burden on my shoulders.

Whew. :cool:

[t_niehoff]

AmanuJRY wrote:

In reading this thread, I had an epiphany...the fight between Boztepe and Cheung...has...absolutly no bearing on my martial development. Wow, now I can just go train without that heavy burden on my shoulders.

**Actually, I think that fight had many important lessons and/or questions that we can all use to further our "martial development" because it involved two long-time WCK practitioners actually fighting (as opposed to demonstrating or touching hands) and by seeing their shortcomings, we may gain insights that will help us. Or, we can close our eyes, hide our head in the sand, and refuse to acknowledge that it happened, or that it was some sort of unhappy fluke, etc.

**For example, it demonstrated fairly clearly what a typical fight -- not "sparring" as so many typically praactice it -- "looks" like. Is this what you (the general "you") are preparing for? Neither Cheung or Boztepe were, at the time, despite years or decades of training in WCK, that prepared for what transpired (based on their performances). That's important because if they did all that WCK training and were not prepared (skilled), we should ask ourselves, "why?" Is it because, as some say, that WCK is just not functional or because the way they trained just didn't prepare them adequately? If Cheung or Boztepe couldn't use their WCK, why not? Is it that easy to put somoene in a situation where WCK can't really be effective? If so, what does that say about WCK for self-defense? I could go on, but you get the picture.

**Some think the Cheung-Boztepe incident was a black day for WCK. So do I. But what's great about black days, about defeats, is that we learn the most from them. So from my POV, that was one of the best things to ever happen to WCK -- it should be a wake up call rather than something to dismiss and ignore (to protect our fragile egos).

[Ultimatewingchun]

"For example, it demonstrated fairly clearly what a typical fight -- not "sparring" as so many typically practice it -- "looks" like. Is this what you (the general "you") are preparing for? Neither Cheung or Boztepe were, at the time, despite years or decades of training in WCK, that prepared for what transpired (based on their performances). That's important because if they did all that WCK training and were not prepared (skilled), we should ask ourselves, "why?" Is it because, as some say, that WCK is just not functional or because the way they trained just didn't prepare them adequately? If Cheung or Boztepe couldn't use their WCK, why not? Is it that easy to put somoene in a situation where WCK can't really be effective? If so, what does that say about WCK for self-defense? I could go on, but you get the picture. " (Terence)


YES, YOU COULD GO ON...and on...and on...because you've come to enjoy trolling, Terence.

But let me ask you a few questions:

Who has Robert Chu (your wing chun instructor) ever fought?

And who has Hawkins Cheung (Robert Chu's instructor) ever fought?

Come to think of it - who has Terence Niehoff ever fought?

And here's another question for you:

Are you aware of the fact that your sifu, Robert Chu, emailed me recently to clear the air about a few things - including telling me that he has great respect for William Cheung, and that William was one of his boyhood idols???!!!

Are you aware of that, Terence?

Or are you just too busy being the "ambulance chaser" of the wing chun forum?

The lawyer who's ALWAYS looking for the opportunity to make something (ie.- a profit) out of unfortunate events. William Cheung, 46 years old at the time, literally slipped as he was throwing a kick on a parquet floor, while wearing the thin Chinese slippers, and after being surrounded by a bunch of guys, one of whom ran up behind him and pulled his pants down, and being confronted by the leader of the pack who was standing in front of him, while being a lone Chinese man in a foreign caucasian country, and suffered no physical bruises whatsoever by the time it was over...

And you,Terence Niehoff, playing to the UG crowd, want to continue on and on about it 19 years later?

You're a troll, Terence.

Plain and simple.

A troll.

And don't bother trying to tell me that I'm "taking it all wrong"...that I'm "misinterpreting your meaning"...that you're only trying to point out "the importance of realistic training"...

and all the other BULL5HIT that you give whenever you've been called about your trolling...

because I know, along with many other people around here by now, that all of that simply serves as a COVER to hide your real motivations...

the same things that motivate every other troll:

petty jealousy
personal insecurity about HIMSELF (and his own martial abilities)
vindictiveness
personal ambition (that seeks to climb up by kicking others down)

This is you, Terence.

[Nick Forrer]

so according to YOU................

Joy is a Racist, Hendrick is a drug addict and now Terence is an ambulance chasing Bull5iter.............

FUNNY how its only YOU.............that resorts to personal insults WHEN someone disagrees with you.....

your interpersonal skills NEED a bit of work...........................Victor

[Samson]

I agree with that he is a master of pointing the finger instead of facing the truth

[Samson]

I agree with that seems Victor always points his righteous finger to avoid the truth

[AmanuJRY]

Is there a reason you didn't just edit your first post?

[Ultimatewingchun]

"I agree with that seems Victor always points his righteous finger to avoid the truth." (Samson)


WELL SINCE we're on the subject of truth...Samson's real name is Dave Mead - and his motivation for this entire troll thread about William Cheung is the fact that one of William's top students, Phil Redmond, threw Mead out of his class (in Detroit)...for being way too much of a wise ass...and after Mead tested the waters elsewhere (which didn't work out for him)....he wanted back into Phil's class - and Phil said no.

Hence this BS thread.

[Samson]

Wrong again Vicky, wound never train TWC they seem to not be able to fight another Wing Chun group that makes excuses to why they wont fight

[Ultimatewingchun]

I'm not going to argue with you about who you really are, Dave Mead...only came back on this thread to answer Terence - as his William Cheung/TWC trolling has become too overbearing.

But I know who you are.

Adios.

[YungChun]

This is a very "hot button" issue for some folks around here....

People should be aware and considerate.

I see this incident in a similar light to this kind scenario:

Young hotshot Boxer with entourage corners old time ex-boxing champ while doing a seminar.

Young hotshot Boxer with entourage tells old time ex-champ he wants to fight him and prove he is a better boxer.

Old time ex-champ says WTF I'm in the middle of a seminar.....

Young hotshot Boxer with entourage then tackles old time ex-champ.

Old-time ex-champ surprised, unready and wearing slippery shoes goes down to the ground.

Young hotshot Boxer with entourage throws ineffective punches from the ground.

Old time ex-champ arises a few minutes later uninjured and continues seminar.

Which conclusions might we make here?

1. Don't wear slippery shoes when doing seminars?

2. Bring own entourage in future?

3. When trash talking BS starts sick your entourage on them?

4. Boxers don't wrestle very well?

5. Young hotshot Boxer preferred his grappling skills over his standup game?

6. Challenges ain’t what they used to be?

7. Boxing is no good - a myth?

8. Neither fighter can box?

:p

[Samson]

Well Victor anytime,
Bernard Walatkiewicz
6154 West 3RD St, Los Angeles Ca
90048
I would like to come visit you!

[SAAMAG]

I think there are too many internet tough guys around here now. I've sort of stopped coming around as much because of the monotony of the threads...nothing productive is being discussed....am I the only one that notices this?

This thread...and most of the other current threads....are offering nothing of a constructive nature. It's getting old guys. Really.

[Ultimatewingchun]

I can be reached at:

wingchun@usa.com

[WCis4me]

Wrong again Vicky, wound never train TWC they seem to not be able to fight another Wing Chun group that makes excuses to why they wont fight

:eek:

Uh how did my name get brought into this riduculous discussion?????

:confused:

Btw I totally agree with and have done the same as Vankuen. There is more whining, gossiping and backstabbing going on from people/martial artists these days than there is at a weekly b*tch & stitch.

Funny it seems it is always the ones that say they are the toughest, baddest, martial artists/fighters that are doing all the b*tching/whining/gossiping about EVERYONE else. This thread and how it started is a PERFECT example of a common trend on this and other forums lately.

Pretty sad that you can only feel good about yourself while cutting down and gossiping about others that you have not even met, even when you have never been personally involved with who/what you are talking about. I Guess it is the need to have constant drama in your life to thrive and feel like your alive.

Notice none of the 'greats, grandmasters, etc' don't waste their time with any of these forums. Gee I wonder why?

BTW, also like the new format, hence the playing with the smileys. :D

Vicky

[Ultimatewingchun]

Just to set the record straight...this guy Dave Mead (Samson) wasn't thrown out of Phil's wing chun class - he quit on his own.

But after testing the waters elsewhere, and it wasn't going well, he wanted back into Phil's class; but precisely because he was such a wise ass is why Phil said no...and then he starts this thread.

[azwingchun]

I think there are too many internet tough guys around here now. I've sort of stopped coming around as much because of the monotony of the threads...nothing productive is being discussed....am I the only one that notices this?

No, I'm with you on this!

[t_niehoff]

Victor,

Sorry for the delay responding, but I'm in trial and pushing to get it over in time to leave for the weekend, so I can only post in the early am or late pm.

---

I know that you have strong feelings (of loyalty, etc.) for Cheung and speak from that perspective. But IMO that's one of the many problems associated with WCK -- too much personality, too much lineage, too much sifu, etc.

Put aside your emotional attachment for a moment and look objectively at the Cheung-Boztepe fight; it looks like a fight between two schoolboys, like a fight between two MMAists -- in other words, it looks like a fight. That is one of many important lessons we can learn from that fight. Seeing that fight, we can see the performance of its participants. Now you can avoid looking at it, you can try to rationalize it all away by excusing what happened on Cheung's choice of footwear, you can buy into Cheung's attempts to explain it away, or you can see it for what it is and *learn from it*. You sound like the cop on "South Park" -- "nothing to see here, move along . . . . " Well, IMO, there is a lot to see there -- you can't hide your performance -- and a lot of lessons to be derived from it.

If WCK is to grow, it's not enough that we change how we train; we also all need to get rid of the stuff that holds us back. And emotional attachments to our sifu, our lineage, etc. need to go -- in fact, the whole notion of sifu, lineage, etc. needs to go IMO. I've said many good things about Cheung in the past, including that he is among a small group from Yip Man's school who developed any significant degree of fighting/WCK skill. I've said he was known as a fighter. All of that is true. But when he stopped fighting (when he left HK), he stopped growing as a fighter, and began to loose his fighting skills. That happens to all fighters when they stop fighting (how good do you think a BJJ BB that hasn't rolled in 20 years will be? or a boxer that stopped sparring for 20 years?). Forms, chi sao, demonstrations, etc. won't maintain fighting skills. And the better skilled you are, the more you need to do to maintain it. He was never a world-class fighter anyway; no WCK practitioner has ever *proven* themselves to be world-class level.

Certainly Cheung can teach WCK and your training with him may very well have been productive for you. He's like a ex-golden gloves boxer that teaches boxing -- he had some solid skills when he was younger and sparring frequently, and he may still have a residue of those skills; he knows about boxing; can teach it to others; etc. But that's it. Lou Duba may be the best boxing trainer in the world, and he used to box when he was younger -- he may have even been a good boxer. Now, just about anyone could out-fight him. That's not taking anything away from Lou. He can help anyone develop into a good boxer *if they do the training*. But Lou isn't the most dangerous fighter in the world, not even a good fighter. He doesn't have to be. I'll bet Boztepe could have taken down a 50 year old Duba too.

You brought up my instructor. Well, I don't claim anything about Robert other than he was a good teacher *for me*. He teaches differently than others I've encountered, and it helped *me*, it gave *me* a perspective that opened some doors for *me*. I don't think he would necessarily be a good teacher for many people. And, it doesn't matter to me in the least what Robert can or cannot do or has or has not done. I only care about what I can or cannot do. My claim that he has been a good teacher *for me* is based on my development since working with him. But he didn't give me skill, and Cheung didn't give you skill. No one gets their skill from their instructor (you get info or guidance from your instructor). You get your skill from your training, from the work *you* do. Whether you or I have any skill is no reflection on anyone but ourselves. I give Robert all the credit in the world for helping me, and you may give Cheung all the credit for helping you -- but let's not idealize these guys, and put them on pedestals, and talk about how their sh1t doesn't stink, etc.

We need to forget about lineages, about personalities, about titles, about legends, about reputations, about organizations, about families, about all that BS and nonsense and start focusing on those things that matter. Those things that matter are those things that help us develop better skill. Those other things are marketing, and they are used to sell WCK by using things *other than our own proven skills* (a famous name, a "history", role-playing, etc.). Of course, folks with no proven skills need something if they are to sell WCK, so they attach themselves to a lineage, a teacher, a legend, to some external source of validation. When you have your own skill, you don't need lineage, a teacher, a legend, whatever.

[Paul T England]

I think many good points have been made but I think that all of the bulls*** gets in the way of individual progress.

Most fights go to the ground - who says? 95% of stats are rubbish!, many fights do go to the ground but it depends on the circumstances, I know of many that only one person went to the ground.

Cheung / boztepe - I think their is a lesson or 5 to learn there.

Lineage - We should be proud of it and try and represent our family but don't let them hold you back. My wing chun is different to my teachers and his is different to my sigung's. I guess use the tools and your experience to the best end.

street fights / comps - each one is different. You can learn much from comps but probably very little from street fights. Training = learning mindset, fighting = doing mindset.

end of my ranting, back to work.

Cheers for the views guys,

Paul

[Ultimatewingchun]

Look Terence....as you probably know, I also train in catch wrestling, precisely because I'm well aware of the fact that fights go to the clinch and the ground VERY often.

And I've known that long before the Cheung/Boztepe incident. I grew up on the streets of Brooklyn - and I've first seen and done the mount/ground & pound while streetfighting back in the early 60's, for God's sake...

so I think it should be clear to anyone who's read my posts over the last 2 years or so that I believe in crosstraining.

That said - my loyalties to William Cheung are due to the fact that I've learned some great things from him over many years (22) concerning standup striking, kicking, and footwork - and the fact that I've organized so many seminars for him here in NYC (about 25) - including organizing a 60th birthday party banquet for him in 2000 at Chinatown's biggest and most reknowned restaurant that was attended by 90 people...some coming from such far away places as Kansas and Bermuda.

So what I'm saying is that my experience with William Cheung has been very positive and has been sustained over a long period of time. So yes, I'm very loyal to him...

WHICH IS WHY I DON'T APPRECIATE IT when people totally forget who he is and just want to focus on literally 40 seconds of his life that didn't go too well.

OF COURSE THERE'S A LOT TO BE LEARNED FROM THAT INCIDENT, Terence...but I'm never going to stand by and watch as someone tries to take Cheung over the coals about it - over and over and over again.

Because after awhile, Terence, it's no longer constructive criticism - it's disrespect and aggression. That's the whole nature of this thread, in fact, started by some clown who won't even own up to his real name.

You, on the other hand, should know better than to PILE ON.

Now as for this part of your latest post:

"We need to forget about lineages, about personalities, about titles, about legends, about reputations, about organizations, about families, about all that BS and nonsense and start focusing on those things that matter. Those things that matter are those things that help us develop better skill. Those other things are marketing, and they are used to sell WCK by using things *other than our own proven skills* (a famous name, a 'history', role-playing, etc.). Of course, folks with no proven skills need something if they are to sell WCK, so they attach themselves to a lineage, a teacher, a legend, to some external source of validation. When you have your own skill, you don't need lineage, a teacher, a legend, whatever." (Terence)


*I AGREE that we need to forget about lineages, personalities, etc. - and develop our own individual skills...that was the whole purpose of my proposing this get together in Cleveland in the first place.

But you see, Terence...we don't have to constantly kick the people from the past in the ass while developing our own individual skills here in the present.

[whitefox]

Who says 90% of fights go to the ground? Is there someone running all around writing down these stats. I mean there are alot of people in this world, these statisticians must be very busy with all the collecting of data they have to do. :)

[Ultimatewingchun]

I don't know what the percentage is, whitefox...but it's high.

More often than not.

[AmanuJRY]

Well Victor anytime,
Bernard Walatkiewicz
6154 West 3RD St, Los Angeles Ca
90048
I would like to come visit you!



...Porn subscriptions to follow...

[FooFighter]

Victor,

Sorry for the delay responding, but I'm in trial and pushing to get it over in time to leave for the weekend, so I can only post in the early am or late pm.

---

I know that you have strong feelings (of loyalty, etc.) for Cheung and speak from that perspective. But IMO that's one of the many problems associated with WCK -- too much personality, too much lineage, too much sifu, etc.

Put aside your emotional attachment for a moment and look objectively at the Cheung-Boztepe fight; it looks like a fight between two schoolboys, like a fight between two MMAists -- in other words, it looks like a fight. That is one of many important lessons we can learn from that fight. Seeing that fight, we can see the performance of its participants. Now you can avoid looking at it, you can try to rationalize it all away by excusing what happened on Cheung's choice of footwear, you can buy into Cheung's attempts to explain it away, or you can see it for what it is and *learn from it*. You sound like the cop on "South Park" -- "nothing to see here, move along . . . . " Well, IMO, there is a lot to see there -- you can't hide your performance -- and a lot of lessons to be derived from it.

If WCK is to grow, it's not enough that we change how we train; we also all need to get rid of the stuff that holds us back. And emotional attachments to our sifu, our lineage, etc. need to go -- in fact, the whole notion of sifu, lineage, etc. needs to go IMO. I've said many good things about Cheung in the past, including that he is among a small group from Yip Man's school who developed any significant degree of fighting/WCK skill. I've said he was known as a fighter. All of that is true. But when he stopped fighting (when he left HK), he stopped growing as a fighter, and began to loose his fighting skills. That happens to all fighters when they stop fighting (how good do you think a BJJ BB that hasn't rolled in 20 years will be? or a boxer that stopped sparring for 20 years?). Forms, chi sao, demonstrations, etc. won't maintain fighting skills. And the better skilled you are, the more you need to do to maintain it. He was never a world-class fighter anyway; no WCK practitioner has ever *proven* themselves to be world-class level.

Certainly Cheung can teach WCK and your training with him may very well have been productive for you. He's like a ex-golden gloves boxer that teaches boxing -- he had some solid skills when he was younger and sparring frequently, and he may still have a residue of those skills; he knows about boxing; can teach it to others; etc. But that's it. Lou Duba may be the best boxing trainer in the world, and he used to box when he was younger -- he may have even been a good boxer. Now, just about anyone could out-fight him. That's not taking anything away from Lou. He can help anyone develop into a good boxer *if they do the training*. But Lou isn't the most dangerous fighter in the world, not even a good fighter. He doesn't have to be. I'll bet Boztepe could have taken down a 50 year old Duba too.

You brought up my instructor. Well, I don't claim anything about Robert other than he was a good teacher *for me*. He teaches differently than others I've encountered, and it helped *me*, it gave *me* a perspective that opened some doors for *me*. I don't think he would necessarily be a good teacher for many people. And, it doesn't matter to me in the least what Robert can or cannot do or has or has not done. I only care about what I can or cannot do. My claim that he has been a good teacher *for me* is based on my development since working with him. But he didn't give me skill, and Cheung didn't give you skill. No one gets their skill from their instructor (you get info or guidance from your instructor). You get your skill from your training, from the work *you* do. Whether you or I have any skill is no reflection on anyone but ourselves. I give Robert all the credit in the world for helping me, and you may give Cheung all the credit for helping you -- but let's not idealize these guys, and put them on pedestals, and talk about how their sh1t doesn't stink, etc.

We need to forget about lineages, about personalities, about titles, about legends, about reputations, about organizations, about families, about all that BS and nonsense and start focusing on those things that matter. Those things that matter are those things that help us develop better skill. Those other things are marketing, and they are used to sell WCK by using things *other than our own proven skills* (a famous name, a "history", role-playing, etc.). Of course, folks with no proven skills need something if they are to sell WCK, so they attach themselves to a lineage, a teacher, a legend, to some external source of validation. When you have your own skill, you don't need lineage, a teacher, a legend, whatever.

I was amazed by your insight and I loved your comments. Thank you for sharing your point of view. It was refreshing and honest. I hope you live by the words you wrote here unlike some I know in our wing chun community. I toally agree with you and it gives me hope for the future. You are a class act to first yourself and then to your instructors. Moreover I wish there were more wing chuners, nah, martial artists who thought like you. All in all, I wish you all the best.

Yours in Strength,
Bao

[WCis4me]

Well Victor anytime,
Bernard Walatkiewicz
6154 West 3RD St, Los Angeles Ca
90048
I would like to come visit you!

:rolleyes:

Samson,

See this is a perfect example, people talking big and tough. Since you brought my name into this I checked you out, not only are you fake and posted a fake address but you are dumb as well. The zip code for that address is completely wrong. Unless of course you don't know your own address.

It is easy to find on the us postal service site. So you were tough guy enough to make a challenge, gossip, moan, slander others and post a phoney address.

That pretty much explains that Victor had you dead to rites and you had an axe to grind and were too chicken to admit who you were and be a man and admit your axe to grind honestly. Too immature to get over your issues and move on like a man. Instead you chose to create fake drama on a martial art discussion forum, yup you're cool and a badazz. :eek:

Just another perfect example of the backstabbing, coward routine that roams martial art schools and their wannabees today. Can't do it, don't want to put the time, sweat, discipline and effort into it, so talk trash about those that can or have done it behind their backs or anonymously.

Pretty sad when you can't admit your own mistakes and grow from it and move on.

Vicky

[Nick Forrer]

Since you brought my name into this I checked you out, not only are you fake and posted a fake address but you are dumb as well.

Just a thought but vicky may given the context have been intended as a (patronising) dimunitive for Victor, as i presume it is in your case for Victoria.

[WCis4me]

Just a thought but vicky may given the context have been intended as a (patronising) dimunitive for Victor, as i presume it is in your case for Victoria.

Hi Nick,

Good point.
I did consider that and waited for his reply before I edited the first post or posted the second post(he was on at the same time as I was). Also, I do have an in person relationship with the parties that were mentioned and the coincidence was a bit too obvious not to notice. Not to mention the spelling of my name (not what people usually generate to) and the fact that he ignored my post and didn't try to correct me or defend himself if I was wrong, this despite him being able to make other posts (since mine) on the forum in general.

However you could be right. It still doesn't deter from the fact that his challenge to 'visit' with victor and the address he posted to communicate with him was a fraud. I saw it as a trying to be tough act with no real name, no real address, etc. Just full of slander about people (he claims he doesn't know) and he says belong to a system that he would have nothing to do with.

Curiousity makes me wonder why someone who doesn't want to be a part of something (a system, people, etc) puts so much effort, time and lies into showing he thinks he is better, particularly to the people of that system.

Too many coincidences, misleadings, etc., by him peak my suspicions and I stand by my statements. I am too old and experienced to be played as a sucker I suppose :p

Thanks for your comment though.
Vicky

[anerlich]

Since you brought my name into this I checked you out, not only are you fake and posted a fake address but you are dumb as well.

Samson just got PWN3D by Vicky!

Nice one, Vicky.

[Tao Kahn]

First of all i just wanted to say hi to all members on this forum.

I am not going to comment about the Cheung/Boztepe fight beacuse i know (and see) that tensions are pretty high considering this topic and i have my oppinion about both participants. So i'll just keep to that old one " If you have nothing nice to say it's better to be quiet." :D

I just wanted to respond to one earlier post:

"The reason that the Cheung-Boztepe fight is the laughing stock of WCK -- or more accurately, made WCK such a laughing stock -- is because netiher WCK fighter appeared to be using WCK, at least not how they train it or how they portray it in their articles, videos, etc.. In other words, they talk one thing (do this or that) and end up doing another. In contrast, the Gracies say to do exactly what they do: take him down, mount him, submit him. The walk their talk. They train to fight exactly how they fight. Whereas with Chueng-Boztepe, all the bong, tans, fooks, get to the blind side, etc. went out the window when the fight was on. NonWCK people will ask: if the grandmasters can't use that stuff when they fight, then what's the use of training it?" ( t_niehoff )

I would like to explain the difference between training (improving one's abilities) and fighting (using one's abilities to achieve the result) regardles of the above mentioned cheung/boztepe fight. From the tone of the post it seems to me that the intension of the author was to show that wing chun doesnt work. Like wing chun tehniques work only on paper and that real fight and it's "rules" will end up in two wing chun masters doing slopy bjj. A fight is a fight and it does not look like a kung fu movie even when the ones who fight are two kung fu practicioners. Wing Chun is not BJJ, and it has it's own rules and training methods. Bongs, tans and fooks you refer to as they are practised on training do not look the same in their real application in a fight. That does not mean that they can not be used in a fight or that masters are unable to use their tehniques it just means that they are using it on a different level. In the end wing chun looks a lot like boxing....


p.s. sorry for my lousy english

pozdrav,
Ivan

[WCis4me]

p.s. sorry for my lousy english

pozdrav,
Ivan

Good post. I thought your english was just fine.

Vicky

[t_niehoff]

Tao Kahn wrote:

I would like to explain the difference between training (improving one's abilities) and fighting (using one's abilities to achieve the result) regardles of the above mentioned cheung/boztepe fight. From the tone of the post it seems to me that the intension of the author was to show that wing chun doesnt work.

*No, not at all -- I'm saying *their WCK*, their personal training, didn't give them the skills to handle that situation well (a realistic fight). This is what it is an important lesson.

Like wing chun tehniques work only on paper and that real fight and it's "rules" will end up in two wing chun masters doing slopy bjj. A fight is a fight and it does not look like a kung fu movie even when the ones who fight are two kung fu practicioners.

**That is exactly the case. There are what I call "the demands of fighting", and those demands will cause a fight to "look" like the Boztepe-Cheung fight, the schoolyard fight, the NHB fight. Anyone that really fights, will see this. What prevents it looking like that in many instances is cooperation, agreement (including tacit agreement) of the participants (why their sparring looks like kickboxing, for example). What makes BJJ so powerful is that it begins from the standpoint of "this is what a fight is going to be, so let's deal with that" rather than the standpoint of many nonfighters, "I have an idea of how fighting should be . . . ."

Wing Chun is not BJJ, and it has it's own rules and training methods. Bongs, tans and fooks you refer to as they are practised on training do not look the same in their real application in a fight. That does not mean that they can not be used in a fight or that masters are unable to use their tehniques it just means that they are using it on a different level. In the end wing chun looks a lot like boxing....

**I agree with you to a great extent. But let's put it another way: WCK as most people train it does not look like it does in a fight (because some of us, like me for example, try to train it just like it looks in a fight). This is what I was getting at by pointing out that we need to begin by first recognizing what a fight is going to look like. It's not going to look like what many idealize, and WCK in applicaiton isn't going to look like what most practice, thus they are developing no real skill because they practice one thing but will need to do something else when they fight. And the more someone practices (reinforces) doing WCK in a way that doesn't work, the more they *decrease* their fighting skills. That's exactly what the nonfighter/theoreticians are doing. When someone fights (not "spars") as part of their training, they will see what we are talking about. The forms, drills, chi sao, etc. are meant to be supplements, not replacements for fighting; and or fighting should inform how we do the forms, drills, etc. so that our forms, drills, reflect how we really do things in fighting (so we're not practicing one thing but need to do another).

[Samson]

If somebody beat my old Grandmaster up, why did no TWC guys jump in and why did nobody from TWC later on go and whoop on Emin. He is like family to some, if you messed with my family WATCH OUT

[TomasWTUK]

If somebody beat my old Grandmaster up, why did no TWC guys jump in and why did nobody from TWC later on go and whoop on Emin. He is like family to some, if you messed with my family WATCH OUT

.....tell you what, if it means so much to you why don't you go and offer Emin out yourself :p

Your contributions to the world of Wing Chun on a verbal level have been nothing short of inane so perhaps you could raise your stock by showing us that you da man!

Ernie is so right about this forum (cf. relevant thread) and you are sitting utilising your keyboard as a hammer just banging the nails into the coffin. TRAGIC.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Oh, SAMSON...

You're soooo tough! :p

That's why I love you, and want you to be a part of MY family. :rolleyes:

I have a beautiful sister who is a young widow, and she needs a husband...will you consider marrying her? :confused:

She won't cut your hair off and make you weak...I promise.

When can you come to New York to meet her???

[Ultimatewingchun]

Tao Kahn wrote:

"I would like to explain the difference between training (improving one's abilities) and fighting (using one's abilities to achieve the result) regardles of the above mentioned cheung/boztepe fight. From the tone of the post it seems to me that the intension of the author was to show that wing chun doesnt work."

And Terence responded with this:

*No, not at all -- I'm saying *their WCK*, their personal training, didn't give them the skills to handle that situation well (a realistic fight). This is what it is an important lesson.

I'M SORRY, Terence...but I will never let this kind of statement go by without correcting you on it.

Boztepe was a young guy at the time (just starting out in his Wing Tsun career) who probably had a plan to rush in and try and bring William Cheung to the floor (the same way a MMA guy of today who knows that his opponent has better standup skills than he does will try to bring the fight to the floor)...

and William Cheung (46 years old at the time) slipped on a parquet floor as he was throwing a kick while wearing thin Chinese slippers - and after having to worry about all the people who were surrounding him...a Chinese man alone in Germany, etc.

THAT'S IT, Terence. PERIOD.

And the fact that you chose not to accept those facts because YOU HAVE YOUR OWN AGENDA on this forum doesn't change the fact that these are the facts.

So you can go on...and on...and on all you want - but it doesn't change the fact that William Cheung did have skills at the time...but was caught in an unfortunate (for him) situation with very unusual circumstances. It could happen to anybody.

You really need to grow up, Terence.

Your agenda is your own personal obsession (insecurity? :( ) about being fight ready.

It doesn't apply to a lot of people, starting with William Cheung and Emin Boztepe.

[Knifefighter]

WCK as most people train it does not look like it does in a fight (because some of us, like me for example, try to train it just like it looks in a fight).
I am curious as to what specific things you are doing in regards to this. Which techniques are you modifying and how are you doing them? Which ones work without modification? What things have you completely thrown out?

[anerlich]

why did no TWC guys jump in and why did nobody from TWC later on go and whoop on Emin.

OK, just to humour you bit longer...

Several senior Australian students of William Cheung, and probably others elsewhere, offered to do exactly that after the event. Sanity prevailed, Cheung rejected the idea, and some sort of two bit ongoing Hatfields and McCoys saga thankfully did not eventuate.

When another WTer started posting all sorts of ridiculous rubbish on rec.m-a a decade ago, he got his alleged wish for a challenge match from a TWC guy.

Two wrongs seldom make a right, and certainly that is the way it turned out in both these cases.


if you messed with my family WATCH OUT

Which family? The non-existent Walatkiewicz family at the fake zip code in CA? :p :p

This "family" rubbish for what is in affect a network of kung-fu clubs is IMO inappropriate and immature. I belong to a nice family and do not need another.

Every time I hear "kung fu family" I think, "Manson family".

[WCis4me]

OK, just to humour you bit longer...

Which family? The non-existent Walatkiewicz family at the fake zip code in CA? :p :p

This "family" rubbish for what is in affect a network of kung-fu clubs is IMO inappropriate and immature. I belong to a nice family and do not need another.

Every time I hear "kung fu family" I think, "Manson family".

LMAO!!!! Holy cow, ok ummmmmmm checkmate to anerlich

Good points about the rest of the 'fight' scenerio btw. I was just too tired of the bs to go on and 'humor' him anymore with facts and reason, I kinda feel like a cat playing with a dead mouse if you know what I mean.

Also I believe that 'reason' wasn't the only attribute in his (GM Cheung) sensibility. I figure maturity and a need to not have to retaliate on ridiculous ventures with a virtual (at the time) nobody, who lived forever and a day away, who did no real damage to my person or my business, prevailed. I wouldn't have turned a molehill into a mountain either. Of course I have estrogen on my side :p

Good post anerlich!!! ;)

Take care,
Vicky

[Tao Kahn]

"WCK as most people train it does not look like it does in a fight (because some of us, like me for example, try to train it just like it looks in a fight). This is what I was getting at by pointing out that we need to begin by first recognizing what a fight is going to look like. It's not going to look like what many idealize, and WCK in applicaiton isn't going to look like what most practice, thus they are developing no real skill because they practice one thing but will need to do something else when they fight. And the more someone practices (reinforces) doing WCK in a way that doesn't work, the more they *decrease* their fighting skills." (t_niehoff)


I must dissagre with you. I think that you can not train wing chun in this way. If you have an idea of fighting in your head when you are practicisng wing chun, you are not going to get very far.Wing Chun is quite special and is not for everyone. It is to complex and deep to be learnt only to be able to defend one self on the street... it is just too much trouble and work. It is enough to practise on the bag and have a good conditioning and you are going to be better than most and be able to defend against most attacks on the street. You said that we need to begin by recognizing what a fight looks like. I don't agree, that is not that very important at all what is important is to realize that what we are doing is training and that the purpose of that training is to improve our physical abilyties and our understanding of wing chun. Of course we must be aware that training is not fighting and that a fight is something completly different. Fight comes at the end (or even better never) not at the beggining. What is also important is to have in mind that Wing Chun is not (only) a set of movements, blocks and/or punches you apply in this or that situation. It is a sort of auto-pilot which "needs" that our body and mind are configured for wing chun in order for it to work properly. The only way to achieve this is through a lot of hard (wing chun) training. That's why you dont train it just like it looks in a fight. Like in soccer training for instance. If a club wants to be good in soccer, players have to practise tehnuiqe, strategie, shooting, running all sorts of things and only one small part of training they play the game. If all they did was playing soccer all the time they would never be as good. The same is with wing chun, fighting is like playing soccer. I think that it can be good to have sparing from time to time but that is not very important for improving our wing chun skills. And even sparing can not prepare us mentally for the street. I realized some time ago that it is not very productive for my training to constantly think about if my wing chun is gona work in real fight or not. I've been in a couple of confrontations and i saw enough fights to realize that there are too much parameters involved to ever be 100 % certain of the outcome. So as far as i am concerned there is no use in worrying about it. :cool:


But before i go to much astray i must agree with you at something……..after all we are talking about an martial art/skill which means that regardless of what impresses us the most in wing chun and regardless of the reason why we personaly started it up, wing chun is designed for combat and for fighting. Having that in mind i think that persons who call them self masters ( not to talk about a title grandmaster which is as far as i know asigned posthumouly eg. late grandmaster yip man ) should be able to use their wing chun effectively.


pozdrav,
Ivan

[sihing]

OK, just to humour you bit longer...

Several senior Australian students of William Cheung, and probably others elsewhere, offered to do exactly that after the event. Sanity prevailed, Cheung rejected the idea, and some sort of two bit ongoing Hatfields and McCoys saga thankfully did not eventuate.

When another WTer started posting all sorts of ridiculous rubbish on rec.m-a a decade ago, he got his alleged wish for a challenge match from a TWC guy.

Two wrongs seldom make a right, and certainly that is the way it turned out in both these cases.



Which family? The non-existent Walatkiewicz family at the fake zip code in CA? :p :p

This "family" rubbish for what is in affect a network of kung-fu clubs is IMO inappropriate and immature. I belong to a nice family and do not need another.

Every time I hear "kung fu family" I think, "Manson family".

My Sifu was there in Melborne training when this happened, so I asked what happened long ago. Sifu said he was surpriesed to see his Sifu back so early and once he found out what happened offered to take care of the problem (as other's did of course), but like Andrew said Cheung refused and cooler heads prevailed. But from what I understand later on, Cheung was going to arrange some of his best instructors vs. Ting's, so that would have been interesting but really who cares now.

As for family, I must disagree with Andrew here. I do consider my Sifu and fellow students family, in a way of course. Put it this way, if someone put down my Sifu, they would be getting visit from me, and many others, especially the way Boztepe did to Cheung.

James

[Samson]

You are right James someone even pulled Chuengs pants down how embarrassing if that was my GM that guy would have been history

[sihing]

Up until recently I didn't know about the pants being pulled down part of it all. I guess they really wanted to make a example of him. That would have eventually made things worse for them in the end if things had gotten worse...

James

[AmanuJRY]

OK, just to humour you bit longer...

Every time I hear "kung fu family" I think, "Manson family".

Andrew, you F'n rock.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Cool post, Andrew...the whole family/lineage thing is way out of whack. :cool:

[A Soave]

Go to Detroit wingchun.com


GOON ALERT:


A simple answer to your question: The entire "film" thing with Boztepe was an edited joke. Do not be deceived by anything anyone tells you if they are attemtpting to conclude anything by this piece of trash- especially the individual(s) above-its a mere waste of time. This troll and the people behind them at Detroit Wing chun are not interested in anything else other than disparaging GM Cheung and his disciples. They clearly are attempting to discredit GM Cheung generally, and his disciple Master Redmond, specifically, as the above named individuals (named Cedic and Nelson), are competing for students in the Detroit area. This is no way to conduct one's organization.

Please do not entertain or dignify them with your time or attention. They are the kind of individuals we all try and avoid.



Hint: Any person or people spending so much time and negative energy putting down another tells you more about themself than they do whoever they are disparaging. We regard them like ****roaches.....more of an annoyance than anything legitimate.





-Things aren't always as they appear.

A Soave