# Classic VS Practial



## Zenmaster (Jul 19, 2002)

I'm wondering what everyone thinks about this. What I mean is I learn alot a cool techniques that have cool names. But when confronted by a real attacker outside of the dojo I personally belive I wont do anyone technique but will use the parts of techniuqes I have learned. I think Bruee Lee said it best when he was asked what one technique would you use in a street. He replied the best technique is no technique.


----------



## fanged_seamus (Jul 19, 2002)

I think about this one a lot, too.  Personally, I don't care if I pull off a complete technique or not.   So long as I walk away from the encounter, I'll be happy.

That said, working endlessly on the techniques has taught me how to minimize my own exposure to damage while allowing me to hit vital areas on the attacker.  I hope that it's ingrained enough that IF i'm ever attacked, the fundamentals taught in kenpo will keep me as safe as possible and give me the time I need to get out of the encounter.

Ultimately, I guess my philosophy is:
1) Techniques are fun to learn and cool to play with;
2) Forms are pretty and great for learning;
3) Neither of them matter as much as getting out of a bad situation safely.

Just my thoughts...I hope it helps.

Tad Finnegan


----------



## jfarnsworth (Jul 19, 2002)

Well I'd like to think that what I've learned over the years will be there to get me out of a bad situation. Techniques and the forms are just examples of movement and economy of motion. If the attacker throws a right punch then Ideally you do this or that and we'll get x amount of examples on how to defend that. I've been to a few of Mr. Planas' seminar's. I believe it is he that says If you do a technique the way it's supposed to be done on someone in the ideal phase then you'd better call guiness because it just won't happen. There are too many variables into making the technique work exactly. My opinion is that it probably just won't happen. This is where practice and muscle memory come in.  Once again this is just my couple of pennies.
Jason Farnsworth


----------



## WilliamTLear (Jul 19, 2002)

I used to work as a bouncer in a Night Club / Sports Bar named Giggles. It's in Glendale, California about 5 miles from my house. The clubs occupancy is 670 people, and there were a total of 14 security officers working there on any given night (including me). Out of the guys that worked there three of us had martial arts expereince. There was a guy named Walter who studied Aikido (His unique method of gaining compliance in a situation was to bash his assailant in the nutts with his maglight), and then there was Aaron and myself who studied Kenpo at Ed Parker's Karate Studio in Pasadena. Getting into a fight at least once a night was a given. I would have to estimate that an average of 10 full fledged fights would break out in this place on any given weekend. 

Aaron and I had a standing bet each weekend. The guy that executed the most self-defense techniques in a weekend win $20.00 from the other.  

Needless to say, a drunk is a little more complaint than a sober customer... but we had our fair share of both during that time. (Of course we had to limit the techniques that we used to the ones that didn't involve permantently maiming or killing your attacker, which narrowed our arsenal down quite a bit. :lol

My Expereince is that Kenpo works in the real world. Regardless of weather you train the techniques to a second nature, making it easier to utilize the prescribed technique against an attacker in a spontaneous situation, or graft ideas from different techniques to suit you in an altercation. The destination is the same, the path taken to get there is only slightly different.

I am a big advocate for doing both. Deprivation breeds appricaition.

Take Care,
Billy Lear


----------



## Seig (Jul 20, 2002)

I think people put a little bit too much ephasis on doing a text book technique in the "real world".  In all of my adventures, the only times I have ever responded with text book technique is when there was a text book attack.  I can think of twice.  The rest of the time, I relied on my basics.  Afterall, the third phase of Kenpo is the formulation phase.


----------



## WilliamTLear (Jul 20, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Seig _
> 
> *I think people put a little bit too much ephasis on doing a text book technique in the "real world".  In all of my adventures, the only times I have ever responded with text book technique is when there was a text book attack.  I can think of twice.  The rest of the time, I relied on my basics.  Afterall, the third phase of Kenpo is the formulation phase. *



I totally agree with you. Although I have heard many people say that applying a technique in a real fight can't happen either.


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Jul 20, 2002)

You must keep in mind that all the Self Defense Techniques and Forms are just "drills" to develop "Skills", we then take these skills into "Life" with us everyday and hopefully use all of them to our advantage.  Some of the best skills are the ability to avoid putting ourselves or loved ones in danger in the first place.  We learn this thru the philosophical study and 8 considerations....

The movements were never meant to be used completely as a unit.... that is why we spend so much time on the development of the foundation, then work on grafting or blending different movements to form additional understandings.  Then we tailor the best movements we have to ourselves to achieve maximum usage for ourselves.  

I think the confusion comes in when we have a generalized curriculum to teach to the general populous ...... it is not meant for everyone to use all the material.

So the best technique is no technique..... let the defense flow out of you based upon your training so that your mind is calm and at ease, relax breathe and respond naturally.

:asian:


----------



## matthewgreenland (Jul 20, 2002)

I my opinion, and as I have learned, the self-defense techs are only motion and "IDEAS."  Keeping this in mind helps us kenpoists maintian mental flexibility.  

By the way - when the adrenaline is pumping - us kenpoists will be moving soooo fast that we probably won't even remeber what came out until the end of the confrontation.  Hopefully the attack will come, and the next thing we remember is the front crossover, cover out, and scanning the area.  LOL - 

Yes, I too agree.  prefix, suffix, insert, rearrange, alter, adjust, regulate, and delete if and when necessary.

Good discussion.


----------



## Seig (Jul 20, 2002)

> _Originally posted by matthewgreenland _
> 
> *
> 
> ...


I agree, in a confrontation, a Kenpoist will prefix, by trying to avoid the situation, suffix by being prepared to end it, insert a bodily weapon into a viable target, rearrange the attacker's anatomy, alter their (attacker's) appearance, adjust their (attacker's) attitude, regulate their (attacker's) ability to control their own bodily functions (ever again), and delete (the attacker) if necessary.


----------



## Kirk (Jul 20, 2002)

I haven't been in a fight since I started kenpo, but my instructor
pretty much says it the way you all have been so far.  In my 
school, we do informal stick and knife training on the weekends,
so I have kali sticks, and a polyeurothane (sp?) knife for the class.
A friend of mine, who is going to start classes once he's gainfully
employed again, stuck the knife in my back, and said, "what are
you gonna do about it, punk?  

Well I wanted to keep his interest up (would LOVE to have a
training partner outside of class) so I did a filipino defense when
I turned around, and WITHOUT THINKING I did kind of like 
thrusting prongs on him.  I hooked his right arm, which had the
knife, checked middle and high with my right forearm, grabbed
his shoulder, kneed him in the groin, knife edge side kicked his
left leg, and then an elbow to his face.

Now I know that I should've worried about stripping the knife
away first, but this was theory, and I'm a 9 month old kenpoist.
The only thing I did think about was the fact that we were 
playing.   So I didn't wail on the guy.  But he did go "stop stop
stop!" after the knee to the groin.  He was impressed at what
I did to him ( he said he couldn't get away) and I was impressed
that I could actually pull something off.  

I'm a pretty big guy, I haven't even come close to being in a fight
in 10 years (I've been told that I'm "intimidating") and therefore
I don't expect to be in one for another 10 years.  I joined kenpo
as a fun way to try and lose weight, get healthier, live longer, etc.
It sure is nice to know that if ever IN a conflict, that it's possible
I can stick to the few principles I know right now, and actually
defend myself.


----------



## Sigung86 (Jul 20, 2002)

I guess I'm kind of old school, but I find that pursuit of the "classical" leads to the practical.  If you, in fact, approach the study that way.  

Not eing able to complete a technique as shown, in nowise, denigrates what you are doing.  It's nice to know, however, that if a technique should be needed to go beyond the first move, that you do have that bag of tools.

Dan


----------



## ikenpo (Jul 20, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> 
> *I'm a pretty big guy, I haven't even come close to being in a fight
> in 10 years (I've been told that I'm "intimidating") and therefore
> ...



Kirk,

Good feedback....

Let me say this, remove the idea that "I don't expect to be in one for another 10 years" from your mind....basically what you said is I don't acknowledge the first consideration "acceptance"... that there are people and situations out there that will f*** you up if you don't acknowledge that and watch yourself...I only keep it real that way because I consider you a friend and the though of running away from a confrontation isn't likely for a "big guy" so be aware and realize there are a lot of folks out there you DON'T intimidate... 

I disagree with the position the EPjr presented about the "Kenpo fantasy" in his seminar and probably wouldn't have put that out there to a bunch of under belts...He might not stay up late enough to watch the evening news, but my tv stations report murder and mayhem every night...and do you expect it to get better as the economy becomes even more depressed?

Secondly, turn up the heat in the kitchen if you think you can cook. The story you mentioned doesn't mean you won't freeze up and piss your pants if someone does step to you...it just means you react well to friends fooling around. Get a couple of the guys, or just one, to come at you with some verbal assaults...you know calling you some names, approaching you aggressively and quickly (properly padded or whatever) then see what you can do... I remember feeling the same way as a purple/blue...how I could "defend myself"...I was very wrong from a mental stand point regardless of understanding of "principles". Whatever the outcome don't become too discouraged or confident, take it for what it is, an experience to learn from.

It wasn't until some where in Brown (after 7 yrs as a green) that I found that fire of hate for anyone that choose to step to me...That spirit, forged in fire and pain made me finally realize that I could take it to that next level if need be. I credit my previous instructor with bringing that out of me...

jb:asian:


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Jul 21, 2002)

hell, lets see some action........ LOL:rofl: 

:asian:


----------



## satans.barber (Jul 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Goldendragon7 _
> 
> *hell, lets see some action........ LOL:rofl:
> 
> :asian: *



Hehe, imagine what "Fight Club" would've been like if it had been a garage full of kenpo guys and gals who were there looking for pain! Ooo messy!

Ian.


----------



## ikenpo (Jul 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Goldendragon7 _
> 
> *hell, lets see some action........ LOL:rofl:
> 
> :asian: *



Just let me know the next time your going to Jack in the Box....I'll be there for you... 

jb:asian:


----------



## arnisador (Jul 21, 2002)

Please, try to keep the discussion on topic.
-Arnisador
-MT Mod-


----------



## Kirk (Jul 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by jbkenpo _
> 
> *
> 
> ...



Thanks for keeping it real with me JB ... I consider you a friend
too.  The only thing I meant by "I don't expect to be in the next
10 years" is that I'm not (any longer) in the habit of frequenting
'rough' areas, and places where the odds of a fight are increased.
I'm a family man now


----------



## ikenpo (Jul 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> 
> *
> I'm not (any longer) in the habit of frequenting
> ...



Same here...but predators don't seem to care about that...

Wait let me stay on the topic in this open forum where I've seen some of the oddest non-martial arts discussion take place...:shrug: 

The clasical belief is that by not frequenting such establishments you won't run into such things, but pratically speaking trouble sometimes comes to you.

My new favorite saying from my current instructor is...

"chance favors the prepared mind" so even if you can't execute the technique perfectly doing something is better than nothing.

jb:asian:


----------



## Doc (Jul 21, 2002)

After reading this page it points out a glaring difference in Motion-Kenpo and SubLevel Four and other Kenpo. (I only mention it to foster understanding of diverse ideas).

Motion-Kenpo has a built in "Assumption of Failure." Phrases like "I don't expect to be able to do a technique." A technique is only an idea." "too much emphasis on a text book technique in the real world," "The techniques are just drills" etc. illustrate this position. The "teacher" dessiminates information and students assimilate and demonstrate through tailoring what is functional for them. 

Now this is not to suggest that these comments are incorrect, but only to point out fundamental differences in philosophy and teaching between (at least) two interpretations. SubLevel Four Kenpo roots are older than Motion-Kenpo which generally speaking is only about 30 years old. This discussion bolsters Mr. Parker's own position on Motion-Kenpo, it's concepts or "ideas" and as Dennis rightly said, "drills."  But the Kenpo Ed Parker taught before the creation of Motion-Kenpo did not die, go away, nor was it abandoned by Ed Parker himself. 

Other interpretations as well as Sublevel Four Kenpo have a built in "Assumption of Success." We Teach the technique with an expectation it will be used as taught in the beginning, and work the student through it and create basic skills to insure it is functional "as is."

I know this seems strange, but the modern version of Kenpo is anamolous in the arts with the concept of "tailoring" and was unusual in the arts in general until more recently. Although arts like "Systema" and "Jeet Kun Do" are somewhat similar I attribute their success (or lack of) to instruction, not the art. That is, if you studied night after night with Ed Parker would you need to tailor what he taught you? Of course not, because as a teacher he would only share with you what was useful and workable for you. But MK is a "proliferation interpretation" designed to reach masses of people unlike arts that precede it where the top 2 or 3 teachers or even the creator is on the floor with students every night.

But when you as the head of a system have mostly "crossover instructors" you have to send out to teach a lesson plan and these teachers are not studying with you night after night, than conceptual ideas are the only way you can dessiminate this information efficiently and effectively to multitudes of people who are geographically removed from each other and the source. Many leaped from other arts as black belts and simply switched their schools over to Kenpo. This should help you understand why Motion-Kenpo is "motion and conceptual idea based" with instructors forced to expose students to many ideas, drills, and options to insure effectiveness of the vehicle.

Ultimate, Motion-Kenpo is just like every other art. It depends on who teaches you.


----------



## fanged_seamus (Jul 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Doc _
> 
> *Motion-Kenpo has a built in "Assumption of Failure." Phrases like "I don't expect to be able to do a technique." A technique is only an idea." "too much emphasis on a text book technique in the real world," "The techniques are just drills" etc. illustrate this position. The "teacher" dessiminates information and students assimilate and demonstrate through tailoring what is functional for them.*



I don't agree with your interpretation here.  There is a BIG difference between me, as an individual, saying, "I don't think I could successfully execute a technique in the real world" and saying "I don't think kenpo techniques will work in the real world."  I may have stated my position a little differently up above, so let me clarify.

I don't know that I'm skilled enough (yet) to successfully execute a "textbook technique" in a real-life violent encounter.  However, I believe that those skilled in kenpo WOULD execute the techniques as they were designed.

I guess my big difference has to do with how one defines "Assumption of Failure."  In my mind, AoF means that I will always have another strike prepared after my previous strike, to ensure I'm not left surprised and unprepared to deal with an attacker.  Since many other martial arts teach "one strike" techniques, a student could be left as a sitting duck if, say, that reverse punch doesn't kill the attacker.  Kenpo logically teaches techniques with multiple strikes to ensure that we don't fall into the "one strike, one kill" mentality.  Additionally, grafting, suffixing, etc. ensure that the completion of a technique doesn't leave me unprepared.  I can ALWAYS flow into another technique if I need to.

Am I totally off-base in my definition here?



> *Other interpretations as well as Sublevel Four Kenpo have a built in "Assumption of Success." We Teach the technique with an expectation it will be used as taught in the beginning, and work the student through it and create basic skills to insure it is functional "as is."*



Maybe it's just a question of definition again, but it seems that this is what ALL kenpo instructors do.  They work the techniques and the basics, assuming that the student will ultimately use the "textbook technique" to subdue the attacker.  But I absolutely do NOT believe that there are techniques to handle all situations for a beginning student, and that's why the Assumption of Failure matters so much.  It prevents the paralysis that comes with a new situation.




> *I know this seems strange, but the modern version of Kenpo is anamolous in the arts with the concept of "tailoring" and was unusual in the arts in general until more recently. Although arts like "Systema" and "Jeet Kun Do" are somewhat similar I attribute their success (or lack of) to instruction, not the art. That is, if you studied night after night with Ed Parker would you need to tailor what he taught you? Of course not, because as a teacher he would only share with you what was useful and workable for you. But MK is a "proliferation interpretation" designed to reach masses of people unlike arts that precede it where the top 2 or 3 teachers or even the creator is on the floor with students every night.
> 
> But when you as the head of a system have mostly "crossover instructors" you have to send out to teach a lesson plan and these teachers are not studying with you night after night, than conceptual ideas are the only way you can dessiminate this information efficiently and effectively to multitudes of people who are geographically removed from each other and the source. Many leaped from other arts as black belts and simply switched their schools over to Kenpo. This should help you understand why Motion-Kenpo is "motion and conceptual idea based" with instructors forced to expose students to many ideas, drills, and options to insure effectiveness of the vehicle.
> 
> Ultimate, Motion-Kenpo is just like every other art. It depends on who teaches you. *




I agree with most of your statements here -- the success of the art (regardless of what it is) for an individual depends on the teacher.  And any teacher who is not spending time working closely with his/her students is no teacher at all -- he or she is a "studio owner" only.

I think it's a bit of a disservice, though, to lump what you call Motion kenpo in with the chaos that is Jeet Kune Do.  I'm sure there are some "crossover instructors" in kenpo, but I don't see the "lesson plan" mentality you describe.  I don't see the chaotic mish-mash of philosophies in kenpo, nor the lack of in-depth knowledge that a "lesson plan" system would guarantee.  Maybe it's because I'm lucky and have good instructors; or maybe it's because black-belt factories are a losing game in the long run and they are destined to die out ("Martial Darwinism?" :shrug: ).

I know this went longer than I intended, but my points really are this:

1) I think our two definitions of "Assumption of Failure" are different.
2) I think we need to distinguish between an individual's ability to execute a technique in the real world and the technique itself working in the real world.
3) All (good) teachers (regardless of the system) work their students to ensure the basics are mastered and intend for those techniques to work for the student.
4) The teacher is the critical component of the system -- a good system will not work with a bad teacher, and a poor system can work with a good teacher.

Looking forward to your rebuttal.  Thanks.

Tad Finnegan


----------



## RCastillo (Jul 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Seig _
> 
> *I think people put a little bit too much ephasis on doing a text book technique in the "real world".  In all of my adventures, the only times I have ever responded with text book technique is when there was a text book attack.  I can think of twice.  The rest of the time, I relied on my basics.  Afterall, the third phase of Kenpo is the formulation phase. *



Adventures, you say? I'd like to know more about those!

Care to divulge?

As for me, no one's been stupid enough to tangle with me! Say what you want about those good luck charms, they really do work!


----------



## Kirk (Jul 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Seig _
> 
> *Afterall, the third phase of Kenpo is the formulation phase. *



What are the first and second phases?  When does each being?


----------



## satans.barber (Jul 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> 
> *
> 
> What are the first and second phases?  When does each being? *



Isn't the first phase the 'ideal phase' where the opponent is stood in just the right way etc. (i.e. it never happens outside of the dojo!) and the second phase the 'what if?' phase where we start to bring in second punches, or unavailable targets etc.?

Ian.


----------



## Seig (Jul 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by RCastillo _
> 
> *
> 
> ...


Um, no.  One of these days we can sit around and I can regale you, not online though.


----------



## Seig (Jul 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by satans.barber _
> 
> *
> 
> ...


Yes, you are correct.  It seems to me that different people arrive at these phases at different times.
What I *TRY* to do is this:
Ideal: White through Purple
What If: Blue through Brown 2
Formulation: Brown 1 on


----------



## Doc (Jul 23, 2002)

---I think it's a bit of a disservice, though, to lump what you call Motion kenpo in with the chaos that is Jeet Kune Do. ---

Nope. They are the same. Conceptual vehicles loosely interpreted by teachers, and nobody doing what Parker/Lee was doing. Both Lee and Parker told you "WHAT" to do (not how) while they themselves did something different.

---I'm sure there are some "crossover instructors" in kenpo, but I don't see the "lesson plan" mentality you describe. ----

Almost all of the seniors are crossover. It was what Parker used to start Motion-Kenpo. Check all the asterisks on the family tree. Most of them are not cross referenced in kenpo, including me.

---I don't see the chaotic mish-mash of philosophies in kenpo, nor the lack of in-depth knowledge that a "lesson plan" system would guarantee. ---- 

I guess it's relative. I've seen very little real in-depth knowledge. Ed Parker never wrote anything beyond a "Lesson Plan" for MK. No where in any of Parker's writing does he tell you "HOW" to do something. He gives you concepts, ideas, and general guidelines, but no "HOW." Even the manuals tell you "WHAT" to do, not "HOW" to do it. "Right punch to the left rib cage," is a "WHAT" not a "HOW."

---Maybe it's because I'm lucky and have good instructors; or maybe it's because black-belt factories are a losing game in the long run and they are destined to die out ("Martial Darwinism?" :shrug: ).----

Don't know your teachers. But the factories are doing well, because most want to believe they are truly learning something and can defend themselves.

---1) I think our two definitions of "Assumption of Failure" are different.---

Perhaps.

---2) I think we need to distinguish between an individual's ability to execute a technique in the real world and the technique itself working in the real world.---

For me, there is no difference. Why would there be?

---3) All (good) teachers (regardless of the system) work their students to ensure the basics are mastered and intend for those techniques to work for the student.----

Yep! That is what they are supposed to do in kenpo, but most don't.

---4) The teacher is the critical component of the system -- a good system will not work with a bad teacher, and a poor system can work with a good teacher.---

Isn't that what I said? No rebuttal, just my point of view.


----------



## fanged_seamus (Jul 23, 2002)

I think I'll still see distinctions where you see none -- particularly in terms of our definitions of "Assumption of Failure" and "crossover instructors" (I see a difference between an instructor who has trained in other martial arts prior to realizing kenpo was what they were looking for and one who "jumped on the bandwagon" as an opportunist).

And I'm not sure I understand the difference between the "What" and "How" you describe.  How many "Whats" does it take to make a "How?"  In principle, I can conceptually see the difference, but I'm not sure I can distinguish it in the real world.  Care to explain further?

Ah well -- at least we agree on the value of a good teacher. 

Still would like a better understanding of the difference between the "What" and "How" of kenpo instruction....

Respectfully,
Tad Finnegan


----------



## Doc (Jul 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by fanged_seamus _
> 
> *I think I'll still see distinctions where you see none -- particularly in terms of our definitions of "Assumption of Failure" and "crossover instructors" (I see a difference between an instructor who has trained in other martial arts prior to realizing kenpo was what they were looking for and one who "jumped on the bandwagon" as an opportunist).
> 
> ...



That's the problem. Most seem to think the what is the how. "What" has been "sold" as "how" for so long there are generations who think it's "how." Perhaps we'll meet one day.


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Jul 24, 2002)

is  often referred to as the methods of ...........  what methods do you learn Kenpo by?  

What Kenpo do you exactly  study?

:asian:


----------



## WilliamTLear (Jul 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Doc _
> 
> *
> 
> That's the problem. Most seem to think the what is the how. "What" has been "sold" as "how" for so long there are generations who think it's "how." Perhaps we'll meet one day. *



I've been taught the Whats and the Hows, even the Whys... although there are some evident differences in the way that I do Kenpo compared to others. Not wrong, just different.

Take Care,
Billy


----------



## WilliamTLear (Jul 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Sigung86 _
> 
> *I guess I'm kind of old school, but I find that pursuit of the "classical" leads to the practical.  If you, in fact, approach the study that way.
> 
> ...



When the purpose behind the Traditional Way is obscure, change is evident, and the loss information almost definate.

Talk to you later,
Billy


----------



## fanged_seamus (Jul 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Goldendragon7 _
> 
> *How is  often referred to as the methods of ...........  what methods do you learn Kenpo by?
> 
> ...



In answer to your question(s), I study American Kenpo through an AKKI-affiliated studio.  As far as methods go, here's the short list:

1) Watch and mimic
2) Repetition, repetition, repetition
3) Questioning why a move is necessary (or isn't)
4) Trial and error
5) Asking questions about principles in use
6) Trying to find "holes" in the techniques
7) Reading anything I can get my hands on
...

I could go on forever.  I'm more of a thinker sometimes than a "do"er, so I want to know everything I can about a technique while I practice it.  I know it can frustrate the junior instructors because I ask so many dang questions, but hey, it forces them to learn, too, right?

As I said earlier, I conceptually see the difference between "How" and "What," and your explanation of "methods" helps a little.  As always, though, more shared insight would be appreciated!

Tad Finnegan


----------



## matthewgreenland (Jul 24, 2002)

I really enjoyed the creativity.  That got a chuckle out of me.
I liked that.  Good take on the Formula.

Have a great day.

Matt


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Jul 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by fanged_seamus _*
> In answer to your question(s), I study American Kenpo through an AKKI-affiliated studio.  As far as methods go, here's the short list:
> 
> 1) Watch and mimic
> ...



Great Job....... you are a rare breed....... spread your attitude!!

As to additional shared insights........ just ask for further info whenever you want!!

:asian:


----------



## RCastillo (Jul 25, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Goldendragon7 _
> 
> *
> 
> ...



That copy cat!(Tad Finnegan) Boy, what some people  won't do to steal someones elses thunder!:soapbox:


----------



## fanged_seamus (Jul 25, 2002)

That's me..."Mr. Thunder-Stealer."  

Oh, no wait, that was my Native American neighbor back in Nebraska....

Tad "Stop Asking So Many Damn Questions!" Finnegan
:rofl:


----------

