There is no real input - it's become yet another "we've got the real wing chun" claim without any specifics to back it up. But I'm offering MOSHE the chance to get specific, especially since there is another story from another lineage that runs very parallel.
Sorry, but when he makes statements like the "basic movements" one he made - I want to see backup evidence.
William Cheung has said that the Leung Bik version of wing chun he learned (which he now calls TWC) was the authentic wing chun, and if I may paraphrase his claims: these (TWC) movements are the "basic movments of wing chun that are the most efficient."
EXACTLY WHAT MOSHE IS SAYING ABOUT NG CHAN'S WING CHUN.
Okay, but MOSHE also says that Ng Chan's wing chun is very different from William Cheung's TWC in its "basic movements".
Fine, but now it's time to back that up with some details/specifics/evidence. You see, whether you agree with William Cheung's assessment of the TWC "difference" or not (and you don't have to agree)...
and regardless of whether or not you believe William Cheung's story as to where TWC came from...
at least he's shown the world what this "TWC" wing chun system looks like; and yes, in many ways it is different than what the rest of Yip Man's students were doing - regardless of whether or not someone deems those differences as better or worse .
So If you're going to make claims like these - you need to at least show people what you're talking about.
Otherwise, it's nothing but talk.
So this doesn't have to be a William Cheung vs. Ng Chan debate - but simply a conversation that includes full disclosure.