Martial_Artist

Eyes.

Crap. I don't own a gi. So I can't say whether I like mine or not. When I train I just wear sweat pant and a t-shirt. When I spar it's either that or street clothes. I guess my 'gi' is sweat pants/shorts and a t-shirt/no-shirt.

Wow, I guess my music tastes while I work out are on the odd-side. When fighting, exercising, or training I love listening to instrumentals. Yanni (his album Tribute being very nice), Lorrena McKennit(sp?), soundtrack to Last of the Mohicans, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, ENYA, mostly soundtracks to movies. I can't do it to heavy metal. I just can't get my mind to flow while listening to that. And having clarity of thought is very important to me while training. I have fought, before, with really loud metal music in the background and it didn't bother me. Just while training have I got to have the instrumentals. Either that or no music at all (being outside). Looks like I number in the minority on music tastes for training.

They do that, pushing and getting into your face primarily because they're afraid, and they're testing how far they can pump themselves up. That's why they push first, most of them. Subconsciously they want to intimidate you into submission to their will without having to throw any punches, because if punches start to fly then there's a chance they could get hurt. Most everyone fears pain, or at least the prospect of pain. Bullying and the like are mostly psychological problems the person has with himself. So he bullies others to fill some gap in his soul. If someone at school wants to fight you, it's not worth it unless they actually try to hurt to you. Walk away. Don't push back, don't even punch back. Why? Is your life threatened? It's just a school fight. Pride is more than likely at stake rather than physical harm. It's not worth it. There is usually nothing worth "fighting" over at school. The fighters are young, undisciplined, and still learning about life, i.e. growing up. Just don't worry about it. The worst that happens is that other teenagers ridicule you. Fight only if you absolutely have to. If there is no alternative, then fight. But if you can walk away, no matter if your pride is at stake, then walk away. You know you can fight, and that's all that matters.

SigSauer P-220.

I don't think it matters. We are not martial artists to gain the respect of the world. Being a martial artist won't gain the respect of others. It's not the western way. There's nothing wrong with it. Why should the opinion of "lesser" rile you up so? About martial artist beings the deadliest. It is the reputation martial artists have that attracts the tease. Most martial artists are not deadly kung fu masters, most people know this. Thus the teasing. The reputation of those before has tainted the reputation of those to come. I don't think this is much of an issue. Honestly, who cares what the other guy thinks of you? Who cares if they disrespect us? The mere fact that we study martial arts doesn't merit us the respect of others. Respect is something gained on an individual level. Just being a martial artist doesn't mean you must be respected. My advice: just relax. Don't let it get to you. Truthfully, who cares? Let them laugh it up. Also, I don't think laughter would have any ability to provoke anything that is vastly powerful. Does the lion answer the challenge of the skunk? No, why should it. Every animal in the jungle knows the lion could kill the skunk. The lion doesn't need to prove that. Should the laughter of others provoke you so; like the coals of a fire being stoked? It shouldn't. You know your true self. You don't have to prove it to anyone. p.s. you said, "if he knew i was trained and thought i could and WOULD beat the snot out of him, why provoke me?? " The answer is quite simple: he doesn't know that.

Coltmakai, "Closer to real fights than any other competition." I wasn't comparing it to other competitions. I have been in a few street fights, more than I would have wanted. Not a single fight I have been has ever been exemplified in a NHB fight. I find the dissimilarities greater than the obvious similarities. So, as far as preparing for a street fight, watching a NHB fight has absolutely nothing to offer. Let me explain why. If you were preparing yourself for street-fighting you would look for things to better equip yourself for such situations, correct? Correct. Now what part of an NHB fight prepares you for a street fight? Will you be suddenly caught off hand in a ring by your attacker? Will you see him at the other end waiting for the "GO" signal? Will you be in appropiate garb? Is it guaranteed you will go to the ground? Will not gouge your eyes out, or spit on you, or pull a knife? You see, aside from entertainment value (which I personally see none) there is nothing of value to someone preparing to fight on the street. Now, HOWEVER, if you were preparing for competition in a NHB fight, there is a veritable plethora of knowledge in watching a NHB fight. But that's it. I suppose I am one to be preached to about what is the perfect martial art. Thank you for pointing that out to me. I think your emotion is misdirected here. I have said nothing to debase mixed martial arts. Where did you get the idea that I was saying anything contrary to learning all you can? The latter half of your post, was it directed to me? I, very openly, speak of not limiting yourself to any one thing. So the latter half of your post eludes me. Unless, it wasn't directed to me. Which, if that isn't the case, then there is nothing more to write. p.s. Who is doing any slandering?

Jet-lag is a good friend of mine. I travel a lot, twenty plus hours a flight. (I go to Asia a lot) Here's somethings to do that I find helpful: If you're going to be adjusting time at your destination, spend two days prior to flying to adjust your sleep time to the time at your destination. When I go to Philippines, for instance, I spend time here living as if I was on Philippine time. When I arrive it's much easier to get some sleep. Sleep on the plane. Do your best to sleep on the plane. When you arrive at wherever it is you're going, take your shoes and socks off and make fists with your toes on the carpet. Feels great. When you arrive, if you have the time, get some sleep, but make sure you adjust to the time zone. If you arrive in the mid-afternoon sleeping like it's nighttime won't help equalize your internal clock. I'm no expert but that's what's helped me. Try it. It might work for you.

Tapout, You have said, ah revealed, more in your paragraph than perhaps necessary. What you know, or don't know about me is only what I want you to know or don't know. To assume otherwise, from a mere internet post, is quite revealing to character. Obviously, in your great insight, you have seen into me. You know the extent of what I know, you know the limits, and boundaries, of what I know. Listen, Tapout, I don't make personal attacks based solely on the merit of an internet post. You'd be wiser to avoid assumption (embarassment can oft be avoided this way). Yes, I admit, you know my martial arts education far better than I. Of course, you above all else would clearly see I possess no knowledge of grappling. May I ask a simple question? How did you reach this? If only you knew where my education extends. Ah, now this is funny. Yes, I do not enjoy NHB matchs. As I said, I find them boring. Watching one usually does nothing to educate the viewer. I mean, in reality we all know that when you fight on the street you'll take the guy to the ground and hold him. So it loses its entertainment value. But, hey, why should what I say matter at all, right? Obviously I am uneducated in this matter. What weight should the opinion of an uneducated hold? I think you've answered that one already. Why don't I fight in NHB matches then? Right? If I suddenly know so much, then why not get in the ring, right? The answer to your question is simpler than you might expect. Quite simply, Tapout, I have nothing to prove, to anyone. Why would anyone get into the NHB ring? To prove to others they can fight. To prove they are champions. To prove something to someone. That, simply, is not why I train. It is not why I fight. I have nothing to prove to anyone. I don't fight for sport or show. Never will. That's not what my martial art training means to me. I train for something vastly different, and I have no ego to feed to compel me to have to prove something. So, again you ask: why don't I fight in a NHB fight? I don't need to. I know my skill level. I know what I am capable of. I don't need to get into a ring and prove it to anyone, least of all myself. Besides, us uneducated people might end up breaking rules in a real NHB match and get disqualified. I think, Tapout, that you have vastly underestimated me. I don't train in the martial arts to fight in a ring, or any contest. I train to fight. To win. To survive. What I train to do would automatically disqualify me in a NHB match. Maybe that will quell your question. I don't really expect you to understand. I mean, after all, you are far more educated than I am about grappling, and the rambling of the uneducated usually don't make much sense, right? So let's just leave it at that. By the way, you'll come across more reliable as a source of information when you don't contradict yourself. You said you had no meaning behind posting those video clips. If so, then why all the derrogatory comments about the two martial arts that 'lost' in those videos? Weren't those videos supposed to support your statements? (Like, "Why would a kungfu fight a BJJ, when it's obvious he'd lose?) Where did you get that? I think maybe you placed the video to support your statements. Of course, maybe I wrong. I'm not perfect. Or MAYBE, it's those cheap drugs I take that you have so much insight into. Once again, since you know as much about me as I see fit to disclose to you, you would sound so much more credible not to stake claims to knowing what I know. Why do I speak on subjects I'm not educated on? Simple. I like to make stuff up that sounds good. But, hey, obviously I'm not educated in grappling. Finally, NHB matchs are no more real than point matches. Sure a lot more pain is involved. But what is real, meaning closest to meeting what you would on the street, about two guys faced off in a ring, wearing what they consider the best fighting clothes, knowing in advanced when the fight will be, and having the protection of rules? You know what, maybe some of these guys actually run around town in those little speedos. Or better yet, it's such a comfort to know that in a real fight my eyes won't get gouged out, my bones won't be broken, I won't get bitten, etc. NHB fights are just grittier contests, they don't teach anything about real, meaning stuff found on the streets, fighting. How could they? They're contests of strength, with rules and guidlines. They're not fight to the death, no rules, gladiator type matches. But, then again, I have obviously never watched a NHB match, and I, obviously, have no knowledge about them. I don't think there is anything more I could write about this. I'd like to talk about strategy in a fight. Effectiveness, efficiency, strategy. I think others would bore with further posts on how uneducated I am. Forgive my rambling, I am uneducated in such things... _________________ Aut non tentaris aut perfice. Aut inveniam viam aut faciam. [ This Message was edited by: Martial_Artist on 2002-08-01 12:20 ] [ This Message was edited by: Martial_Artist on 2002-08-02 04:09 ]

I saw both of those video clips. Quite frankly I don't see the point. What is the point in even referring to those clips? Is something trying to be proven? If so, what? You need to clarify your purpose better in order to be better understood. Perhaps we don't all see in the same light as you do, Tapout. The clips provide inconclusive data to form a basis for any judgement other than, more material should be viewed before a judgement made. The first fight, as real as it looks, also looks as if could have been staged. The grappler moved his leg in synch with the kung fu guy in the opening manuever and they both moved together. Coincidence, possibly. Just a thought, perhaps an abstract observation looking too deep into the video. (Problem is, I've seen plenty of faked videos on the net) Second the fight isn't really a fight. It's a wrestling match. The first video is clearly not a prime example of style vs style (which is pointless in itself), but an excellent example of mismatched opponents. I'm sure the skinny Kung-Fu guy was not matched to the built grappler. So judge the art??????? Incompetent judging if that is your basis. The video disclosed nothing of interest nor proved anything conclusive. Verdict: useless video without anything to substantiate its authenticity; or further complimentary videos. The second video is a promo video for a Muay Thai club. First rule when viewing a promotional video: the video is biased and been prepared to highlight their goods. The video was chosen because it pit a semi-experienced Muay Thai fighter against an obviously inexperienced TKD fighter. To the untrained, an uneducated mind, this fight is very interesting. Muay Thai comes across as very powerful. But viewed in true light, the video does nothing more than show the outcome of an experienced fighter fighting an inexperienced fighter; and has no bearing on art/style. Another boring video. For reason plenty, the video does not concretely prove anything. Only to the mind without wide knowledge of the martial arts would this video come across as, "Muay Thai is vastly superior to TKD." Because, the untrained, uneducated martial arts mind, would not notice the subtle clues poignant in the clip. Thus, Muay Thai, in the video, is vastly superior to TKD so that the Muay Thai club can gather more students, especially those who have no knowledge of the martial arts. It's a very simple advertising technique. Show the uneducated something that appears solid and they will buy. (Think detergent commercials. Without any knowledge of what detergent does, how impressive it is when a guy cleans his heavily-stained clothes in a bowl with a spoon in 15min.) So that video does nothing. The videos have very little entertainment value, and no education value. There is nothing to be learned by watching the videos. Watching the KungFu/Grappler video does not teach us that grappling is far greater than kungfu. Watching the MuayThai/TKD video does not teach us that Muay Thai is far greater than TKD. Neither of the videos do anything constructive. Tapout, nothing personal, but you don't sound like you understand much about the martial arts. Certainly, I don't know you, so to make such an assumption is quite presumptuous, but I will forego that faux pax. What are you trying to prove? And to whom? Has someone offended you and you seek recompensance here? Why the angst? Perhaps, in a matter-of-fact manner you would like to explain why such is better than such? I have never known a coherent/logical statement to come from a mouth of anger. Do you feel threatened in any way? Why so hard on the defensive? Do people's opinions matter that much to you? Why? Also, what does it matter if kungfu is lesser than MMA, or MuayThai greater than TKD? I think you have missed the essence of martial arts. Perhaps you fight for glory in the 'octagon', perhaps your definition of a great martial artist, or the best type of martial artist, is one who can hold is own in a NHB fight. Just out of curiosity, what makes NHB fights so pivotal? Why does entering one mean so much? Does fighting in an NHB match make you a "real" martial artist? Personally, I find NHB fights extremely boring and lacking any real user-value. This may offend you, but I don't care. A NHB fighter wrestles, he grapples. He, speaking very generally, limits himself to just that. My friend, limiting yourself to any ONE thing is very dangerous for a martial artist. As you said somewhere else, [a grappler] fighting multiple opponent doesn't stand a chance. (Of course, I paraphrased and took liberty on your wording, but that was the essence of your statement; which went more along the lines of a bunch of guys fight you and you're messed up. I would assume by your very definition, the person being messed up, I assume again, would be your idea of a fighter. Since you are making the statement out of personal knowledge and, as it seems apparent, you think NHB guys are the greatest that your statement only applies to them. This is true. A grappler facing multiple opponents is pretty much screwed. Because his entire strategy is to get a man on the ground and work him, like a puzzle, into a position to either break or submit him. The fatal flaw in this strategy against multiple opponents is that: while grappling with the one opponent the others are abashedly kicking your skull in. Not a very advanced strategy, imho. If you are a grappler, and that is the style of your choice, that is fine. You will find no attack from anyone here. But be aware, based solely on what I have read so far (I know its not much, but such few words carry so much meaning), that one with such a narrow view of the martial arts won't be taken too seriously if that person doesn't seek amiable communication with others. If you want to talk strategy in fighting, I'm all game. I won't limit it to style, but I will talk fighting. I hope you understand, and I hope this helps a bit. Just a reminder: this is all just my humble opinion. ps. Just because I read somewhere that NHB fights are supposedly the closest to "real" fights anywhere. How does a NHB counter having a chunk of flesh bitten from his arm, his eyes gouged out, or his fingers broken? Oops, wait I'm sorry, those are against the rules in NHB fights. I mustn't forget, "real" fights have rules and such. I can tapout, pass out, or maybe the ref will stop it before it gets serious... _________________ Aut non tentaris aut perfice. Aut inveniam viam aut faciam. [ This Message was edited by: Martial_Artist on 2002-08-01 06:22 ]

Just out of curiousity, what would constitute a 'double-sided' stick? How would you know a stick is double sided or not? This is very confusing to me, please clarify. _________________ Aut non tentaris aut perfice. Aut inveniam viam aut faciam. [ This Message was edited by: Martial_Artist on 2002-08-01 06:23 ]

Uh-huh.....ok. *Feels the drop of I.Q. like a paratrooper* Howdy.

Howdy, even if it is a bit late, the welcome is still warm and extended.

Velcome.

Howdy!

At least once a day. Sometimes more so, but last week I was pretty busy, so not as much as I would've liked.

After a workout make sure that shower isn't a cold one. Your blood capillaries are expaned as well as every other blood transporting tissue and the sudden cold will cause them to constrict quite rapidly. Do so, in extreme cases can cause harm to the heart. I don't remember my source for this, but it was from a health magazine. MSG harms your nervous system. Aspartame is a toxin to the body, once ingested never leaves the system, no matter if you stop it is accumulative. The worst SIDE effect of Aspartme is death.

I think you guys left out the REAL reason Bruce Lee died....Haven't you all heard? It was all over the Hong Kong chinese newspapers years ago. Here's how the legend goes: Bruce was lined up to do movie deals with the foreign devils of Golden Mountain(aka USA) The big Hong Kong hongs of the cinema industry didn't think that would be wise. The local triads were called in to handle the situation. Bruce Lee was confronted and he summarily refused to continue with Hong Kong as his dream of becoming an AMERICAN action star were finally being realized. The assassination had to look like an accident, so thus we have the Bruce Lee died of an acute, hyper reaction, so rare it happens only in 1/1000000 people. That's how a lot of Hong Kong yan(people) think it happened, but true to form, the chinese will never speak it. Another theory, not so popular: The chinese gods killed Bruce Lee to prevent him from finishing perhaps the worst movie ever concocted: Game of Death. They saw what he was making, and in the flash of godly angers killed him to stop such a horrid flick from ruining Bruce Lee's memory amongst the populace. Of course, as all good chinese gods some were probably sleeping or away and didn't catch the parts he had started, or that his name was attached to the film, but they took him nonetheless, joss!

I see. Perhaps this is what you are looking for: When training in sport martial arts the punches and kicks so core to every martial art are 'tailored' to the rules of the sport. For example, as you mentioned, a stance being to wide and open to groin kicks. Whereas in the 'combative' martial art the punches and kicks are 'tailored' to more graphic violence. So the approach to training seperates the sport from the combat. When training for a sport martial art, all your movements are tuned to win the point, without having to factor in all sorts of loose variables, like attacks outside the rules. When training for combat all your moves are tuned to winning the fight, whatever the means, without focusing on limitation to rules. As for "old fist style" and "universal almighty seiken style" I'm afraid you'll have to explain those two to me. I'm a bit senile at times.

I don't recall trashing the thesis of the posts. Anyhow, what are you trying to get at? You want to know what constitutes the difference between sport and combative, right? Yet, the answers have already been given. Sure both train to punch and to kick, to injure and to win. But you forget, 'sport' martial arts have all evolved from their original combative progenitors. So, in form--for the most part--they're going to look the same. You train to punch in one and the punch in the other, so there's no difference there. So where's the difference to be found? In the core of the art, in its essence. The heart behind sport martial arts is the contest. That is the 'why' behind their training. The heart of combative martial arts is mortal combat, that is the 'why' behind their training. That is the difference between the two. Their core essences defining the approach they take when tackling techniques that are basically similar. Punches, kicks, etc. So, what are you trying to get at? Sure, on the surface they are closely related, but why shouldn't they be when one is spawned from the other? The difference between sport and 'combat' is the reason behind the training in the two category of arts. Boxing is a sport, that's the heart of it. A boxer trains to win the boxing match, set rules, guidlines, etc. Sure it IS combative, but why is not a combative art? Because it is a sport. Could it become a combative art? Sure. Just train to box not in the ring, but on the street without rules, and you've changed the essence behind your training and changed the art from sport to 'combat'. Ranking, as much as my personal opinion deters from it, has no bearing on whether an art is combative or sport. The USMC(United States Marine Corps) has a martial arts program instigated that has belts and a ranking system. Does this mean that it is a sport? That it is useless in combat? You decide. The points behind my art and what makes it 'combative' and not a sport is that I don't train to enter the ring and win a match. Thus my art is not a sport. What makes the art a good friend of mine teaches a sport(Grandmaster Kang of Brother's Tae Kwon Do)? Because they train for the ring and competition. That's why they're a sport and I am 'combatitive'. Our movments may be similar, a punch is a punch, a kick...etc. But not the reason or training that backs them up. Sure a sport martial artist could probably fight on the street. But don't suppose raw emotion, anger or fear--it helps, but can ever suffice for proper training. A sport martial artist is trained to throw a punch, but don't expect that training to be sufficient when more than a trophy is at stake. Also, I have had 1 knife fight, my brother two. Neither of us are messed up. I have fought a guy and his friends, I am not messed up. True as it is that your mind is the greatest asset a fighter possess you must not assume possible things are impossible. Taikudoka, I think you truly missed the point of the posts under the link I posted. The answer to what defines the two(sport vs combat), makes them different is found there. Stated clearly, of course the emphasis was on the individual, then later the art, the answers were still there. Sport vs Combat, the difference is the essence between the two. This essence changes the attitudes behind training and the methods and spirit in which training is approached. Very little differs when speaking of technique. What does differ is the approach to the use of that technique. It's that simple. If you want to talk differences, the core differences, that's them. Maybe, if this doesn't answer your question, you're not stating what it is you really want to question. But even then, combat is fighting. Sport martial artist fight too, just under a different spirit. Combat martial artist fight, but under a differnent light than sport artists. So the defining difference is the essence, the reason behind training and the approach to the techniques being learned. One prepares the fighter for a contest, the other for survival. Hope this helps.

Been in a few. Wrong place wrong time. Only one of them has ever gone to the ground. And that was a fight years ago in school on the playground. After that, not once in my adult life. Been in quite a few scraps. None of those have gone to the ground. More than one attacker? Have taken five. Two were trained fighters. More than that? Not likely, unless they're completely stupid or I'm aided. UFC? I don't care about anything done for competition. So, no comment.

51 posts about this. See url below. http://www.karateforums.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=3168&forum=25&51

Do I even go there? Such an interesting thread, provacative at the least. I think there's so much speculation just because of the taboo of discussing it. Personally,(as most of you know I speak a lot from personal experience) it revitalizes the body. In fact, when in need of 'recharge' it's what I look for. The Chinese, at least those in Hong Kong and abouts, have a strange belief therein. They believe that the Yang(male) must constantly be replenished by the Yin(female) and that without this the Yang would wither and die and the man become impotent in life. That's their take on it. As far as other things, I believe it lies with the individual. To each his own.

I don't think you should limit when a kick should be performed. Because that is not the only time that kick will be effective. Case in point: three thugs (I call them such because that's the way they acted) approached and said various things likes, "I'm gonna bleed ya," etc. The three were taken down with three kicks. A front kick to the sternum of the first, a sidekick to the chest of the second, and a roundhouse to the head of the third. The first lost his breath and fell to the ground. The second fell to the ground and began screaming. The third, fell unconscious to the ground. (*NOTE* This fight was totally unprovoked; it was just late at night) The point being(amongst many others) is that you cannot limit when a high kick should be used, or give conditions to its use(ie must following prior blows to the head.) This is because, I (not being alone on this either), have used high kicks most efficiently on the street (I don't fight tournaments, so I cannot comment on high kick usefullness in the ring, but as for the street I am well qualified) High kicks, when done properly are a very important weapon to possess. The problem is most martial artists cannot do them well enough to see their usefullness. I.e. they can't perform them without them being caught. This, however, does not mean the kicks are useless. I attest to their usefullness, their effectiveness, and power. A high side kick and roundhouse to the face has saved my skin more times than I wish they should have. KickChick was very accurate in training your weak leg. You should train to the point where there is no 'weak leg' 'strong leg'. To the point there is no difference. As for height to my kicks(to answer the original thread) I am 6'3" and kick well over my head. I don't find the need to though, as I rarely fight basketball players, a few inches over my height (ie 6'5") I consider no different from my head so not an issue for high kicks. I see nothing wrong with properly executed high kicks. You just have to be smart with them, as with any attack. If you know your opponent is guarding high you wouldn't waste a punch that way, would you? If you know he'll catch your high kick, you wouldn't throw it either. But if either of those scenarios merit the attack then you do it, of course. My point: for those who find my ramblings trying, don't discredit high kicks so easily. Appendix A:(I'm really stretching this one, ain't I?) KickChick mentioned something very important indirectly. It has to do with flexibility. To kick high you've got to limber. To kick fast you have to have excellent muscle control. You must be able to control your leg once it up high. Most people when throwing a high kick just throw their leg up, they have no visible control over their kick. This is because they may be limber, but they lack the muscle dynamics to control their leg once they kick it out FAST. This is a good way to get yourself in a prickly predicament quickly. An exercise I offer is: practice gaining control over your leg muscles related to kicking. Stand facing forward and then hold your hands in whatever stance you wish. Do a front kick with you leg very slowly and hold it perpendicular to your body. Straighten it out all the way. Just hold it there. Don't touch it with your hands, don't lower it, don't waver. Just hold it still and waist level. Hold it for 1min. Then bring it back like a kick(don't let it fall to the ground) and do the same for the other leg. As you progress raise your leg progressively higher. At least to chest level holding it the same for 1min+. A good time frame to hold your leg out in front of you like that is 2min. That is a strong leg and you have control over it. Do the same exercise for a waist-level side kick and waist-level roundhouse. Don't hold your leg and don't support yourself on anything. Just balance. Hope this helps.

Sun Tsu's the Art of War is a military strategic text dealing mostly with castle sieges, large troop embattlements on different types of terrain, and solider discipline. It is not a ninja book. In the final chapter, the 13th, he does make mention of the use of spies, but by his definition they would not be ninja (because they come from the ranks of his troops, the ranks of the enemies troops, of the villages where the enemy had encamped). The Art of War was written by Sun Tsu as a military manual for generals of large armies, and that is what the body of the text deals with. It has nothing to do with ninja. About the japanese meaning of the word. Ninja, etymological analysis, nin = ninjitsu ja = person Inaccurate translation. ja should be sha, that's how it's written in japanese. Ja is the english tongue's inability to pronounce the syllable. nin = bear, endure, hide oneself sha = person (KODANSHA Japanese - English Dictionary) The more accurate translation: one who hides themself. Just to clear up some misunderstandings about Sun Tsu and the japanese language. _________________ Aut non tentaris aut perfice. Aut inveniam viam aut faciam. [ This Message was edited by: Martial_Artist on 2002-07-14 12:56 ]