posted 10-22-2000 07:44 PM              

You're new here, so I'm going to take an uncharacteristically polite and calm attitude to certain parts of your missive.It is obvious that you study Japanese sword arts, and that you enjoy them, and believe in them a great deal. And there is nothing wrong with that. What IS wrong is that it is clear that you have formed an opinion of the Medieval arts with absolutely NO attempt to devote any actual study or experimentation with them, basing this opinion only on two things-your knowledge of how the Japanese sword arts move and what they can do, and what you WANT to believe they can do. Otherwise you simply would not have made the statements that you have. This is an unacceptable attitude in an academic discussion forum.

Please do not be offended as I bring up each point in question as I refute them.This is what is done in the real world of academic research.

"First, modern kendo is in no way reflective of sword styles used by the samauri. As kendo is now more a sport then a serious method for use of a katana."

Correct.I do not pretend to be knowledgeable about Japanese sword arts, but I have seen enough of both these disciplines to know the difference.

"Second, i have to disagree as to a katana's ability to cut through plate armour. I think when used by a skilled practitioner it could do so easily."

You THINK it could. Stop trying to make opinion into fact.On what grounds do you think it could?Are you aware of what happened to European weaponry when plate armor developed? What happened was that impact weapons(i.e. maces, flails,etc.) and piercing weapons(i.e. warhammers, rondel daggers, certain war axes,and just about every sword blade from 1300 on had a sharply tapered point as well as the two cutting edges)and a combo of chopping/impact weapons(i.e. pollaxe, halberd, etc)took precedence in response to it. The reason is that plate armor CANNOT BE CUT BY SWORDS.I hate to shatter the myth but Euroswords if you please were no less sharp than katana before plate armor.And plate armor is the reason why the edges are somewhat thicker on Euroswords than katana; now, if you miss your thrust between the gaps in the armor and crash against a plate,your edge is not going to chip and break because it was too razor-thin, hard, and brittle.Yeah, I know, I've heard it before too--Japanese swords never chip, bend or break....well, guess what--they chip, they bend, and they break. Just like ANY sword when used outside its capabilities. Steel is still Just Steel, and no matter what you shape it like, it still has all the qualities/weaknesses of Just Steel. Plate armor was made and used for one very simple reason: it worked, and better than any other armor in Europe or ANYWHERE.No other part of the world perfected complete plate armor(something even the glorious, immortal, undefeatable godlike samurai just couldn't quite measure up to)and it was only the development of the longbow, crossbows, and eventually the firearm which finally brought it down.

"You could break a katana over you knee if you wanted,"

No you CAN'T. I've TRIED.Don't ask why, it's a long twisted tale(I honestly hate katanas, but that is neither here nor there)

"but when used properly, it can cut through many substances where a european blade would either bend or snap."

And just what might these substances be, and with which katana or Eurosword did you make this attempt? I'm just hearing verbal diarrhea here, man.Can we please knock off the armchair professor act? Thank you.

"As to who would win however, in single combat i would have to go with the samauri. This is because they are simply better trained with their weapon and their style more advanced."

AGAIN with the fictional facts! Tsk! Tsk!

Seriously, all joking aside, this is the most serious misconception you suffer from. Medieval fighting arts, you have to be just as disciplined, you have to have just as much skill, in fact having tried it both ways, I'll even go so far as to say you need MORE skill to effectively use the medieval weapons .I just this afternoon picked up Mark Rector's "Medieval Combat" which is the first ever English translation of the German fight master Hans Tallhoffer's fight book. In just this one manual, you have to train for EIGHTEEN different combat scenarios including Long sword, pollaxe, spear and long sword(you fight with them BOTH AT ONCE),wrestling, daggers, mounted combat, etc. In that book there are...lemme take a break and count each one.....exactly ninety-three seperate and distinct techniques for the long sword ALONE. Those include attacking, counters,(that's the way medieval swordsmen fight-each attack can also be a defense and vice versa, adding even more subtlety in there to dig up),grappling at close quarters if you cannot employ the weapon, how to either finish it at grappling range or get them out back into sword range.you can even use the sword as a takedown/grappling device as well(that's something even I never would've believed till i saw it! Man, I'm using my sword in ways I never thought i COULD!! ). This is just out of ONE BOOK. with at least another on the way or already out dealing with the ITALIAN school of these methods. And those are only the icing on a bigger cake than any of us thought it could be--more old manuals are dug up each year. We're not making this stuff up-- it's all right there in the words of the long ago masters of the west.

"You also forget that Musashi developed a two sword fighting technique that would make a fight with a european using sword-shield much more equal."

Actually, that DOES intrigue me, I'd like to fight a match like that......But again, Musashi was the exception to the rule, and not everyone with two swords is Musashi.

" their so called willingness to die was not fatalism as westerners understand it, nor was it a simple acceptness of death in battle -- which all warriors would be familiar with. It is more to do with a unshakable sense of honor and obligation to their lord (Daimyo) and to the code of Bushido (way of the warrior)."

Not much different from many codes of chivalry in Europe.

"In japan during fuedal time the only warriors who had a willingness to die in combat were the Sohei warrior Buddhist monks, to whom it was a religious issue."

Kind of like the Knights Templar of Europe. The two cultures have far more in common than most people think. It's a shame so few people in the Asian martial arts community have the balls or brains to recognize this instead of concerning themselves with "this" is better than "that".. Damn shame........

"Read the book of five rings by Mushashi."

I have. It's a good book. But it's not the ONLY book.And My opinion of it is that it is a reflection of one exceptional warrior's personal insight rather than what every samurai could do.

"He talks of such strategies as striking at the opponents blade in order to break their rhythm and then follow to a killing blow."

That sounds like a dead ringer for a prescribed technique from at least THREE Medieval masters: Tallhoffer(German,1467), Dei Liberi(Italian,1410), and Liechtenauer(German, 1348). And those are all I've read in depth, there are probably more. In fact the very fact that the teaching spread across both Italy and germany with such striking similarity lends speculation to the possibility of there having been a common recognized style.

"In relation to the mutual killing's that occured between samauri, this was because the two samauri were of almost equal skill and similar style that this occured, not out of some unwillingness to block."

And that's one of the key points here. Japan only had one main sword style, because for most of their history they only had one sword shape. the substyles(for example, perhaps Yagyu-Shinkage Ryu, or Muso-Shinden-Ryu, or even Musashi's Niten-Ichi-Ryu) might be somewhat different stylistically, their basic moves contain many identical techniques simply because there are only so many ways for one weapon of one type to function.All those stories of amazing Japanese swordsmen occured fighting OTHER Japanese swordsmen.

And I cannot for the life of me understand why certain folks think they have the right to say that one culture's arts of combat are superior to another's when the two cultures NEVER EVEN MET?

"I don't mean to say that the europeans were without skill or that they were completely inferior compared to the japanese warrior"

Doesn't sound that way to ME, mister.

" but i haven't even touched on the metaphysical element of the japanese martial arts that would have given the samauri a distinct advantage."

Okay, cut to "Twilight Zone" theme music, this is really getting out there now.

What are you talking about here? If by "metaphysical element" you mean some mysterious magical "KI" kinda thing I'm afraid I can't give it credibility,that's one of the things that drove me away from Asian arts to begin with,I prefer arts that are scientific rather than supernatural in nature. Just me.I'm not so arrogant or naivbe as to say it CANNOT exist, only that it is too big a leap for me to take.

"Anyways, thats about it. I'm sure there's plenty of people who have lots of answering arguments on what i've said, i'll be looking forward to seeing them )"

Hows about that then.

It's your right to express whatever opinion you have. But you must base them on what TRULY exists, not what you SUPPOSE or WANT to be the truth. Please look into the Medieval systems before making sweeping statements about them(Honestly, Dude, Check out the book I just got. It's titled "Medieval Combat" and It shouldn't be hard to get, I stumbled across it at a Borders Books, of all places, and it's probably right at the Netsword Bookstore by now. You'll be pleasantly surprised)

Sorry if I was a little hot with you at times, but this is kind of a crusade of mine

Andy

posted 10-22-2000 10:15 PM               

i wasn't offended in the slightest, quite amused at points actually, i welcome having my points challenged.. after all, thats what discussion is about right??

Re-reading over what i wrote i realise i took a bit of a one-sided point of view (that being japanese), and also kind of got carried away and rambled a bit )
But that was merely to provide another point of view which i felt had been a little neglected in the discussion so far. While it is true that i do have more experience with japanese sword styles.

Now a few of the points you so ruthlessly crushed were in fact told to me by others, so i have no objection to that, i'm taking it as a learning curve

Others however i have to question a bit. Well firstly, i never said what i THINK = FACT.
I was under the impression that since this is a DISCUSSION forum that you are well within your rights to say what you think. Just as everyone else can say that they THINK your wrong.
Especially in this case as it is a theoretical situation here. There are going to be a lot of people saying who they THINK would win, so i can't see the problem there.

I don't pretend to be highly knowledgeable on european technique. Which is why i focused on japanese sword specifically, cause its what i'm more familiar with. I realise in doing so i was making statements that i didn't know that were wholly correct, i did this to give someone(like yourself) the opportunity to prove them wrong and say why. Thus I know and so do other who read the post.

The one major problem i have with your post andy is not that you were overly harsh or anything like that. I'm not so high strung that i get offended that easily

It was your ditching on the metaphysical aspects because you can't prove it scientifically. Out of all the close minded and ignorant views i've heard.. this is one that annoys me not matter how many times i've encountered it.

The reason that i didn't go into depth with it was because it is such an extensive topic that i'd be here for year or so. I will say a few things however.

I was referring in part to Ki when i made that statement. I don't know what asian arts you have previously studied, or what to do with the metapysical you witnessed that turned you away from them but i have seen, done and had done to me some truly amazing things that turned me away from the skeptical view.

For example, I have been thrown by my aikido instructor WITHOUT him touching me. I go in for a head strike and BAM! i'm on the floor, i assure you that there was NO contact.

There are several other examples of this, find a decent book on tradtional japanese arts and it'll mention Haragei, Kiaijutsu and stuff like that. Trust me, i've seen this shit work, its freaky, and yes, pretty 'out there', by real none-the-less. Finally, just because there is no scientific explantion KNOWN, doesn't mean there isn't one

Anyways, thats about it, thanx for the correction in relation to some of the points i made, i hope you'll try to keep an open mind and actually read a bit more on the metaphysical of the various arts before you discard it completely.
I'll look out for that book you mentioned also

posted 10-22-2000 11:25 PM            

U.K.C._Cur_and_Feist

So, would this be the proper armour:

Higgins_Armory_Hunting_Gallery

posted 10-23-2000 04:57 PM              

"a few of the points you so ruthlessly crushed were in fact told to me by others,"

That's kind of what I thought. You don't come across as someone biased against European arts, but some of those statements are commonly regurgitated by folks who are, to the point where they are accepted in the field without even trying.

"Others however i have to question a bit. Well firstly, i never said what i THINK = FACT."

Well, I suppose that's yet another miscommunication we can chalk up to seeing words without the person's meaning behind them(ah the joys of email ).

"The one major problem i have with your post..... was your ditching on the metaphysical aspects because you can't prove it scientifically. Out of all the close minded and ignorant views i've heard.. this is one that annoys me not matter how many times i've encountered it."

Hmm. Kind of like how I never fail to get cheesed off whenever someone into fencing or japanese sword arts launches straight into the"Moron-With-No-Training-And-A-Sharpened-Club" Myth concerning Medieval fighters.And unfortunately this happens a LOT even here.

But I never said they *Could Not Possibly Exist*, merely that I thought it to be very rare if it did, and so I don't think it accurate to say that a samurai would be automatically assumed to always have a "metaphysical element" which would give them the edge.People with such talents of this nature tend to be very rare so I don't think you could say that(How many of our CURRENT soldiers are, say, psychic, or telekinetic, or prescient, or *Insert Phenomena Here*).

"I don't know what asian arts you have previously studied, or what to do with the metapysical you witnessed that turned you away from them....."
Kenpo, three years, Taekwondo, half a year, judo, half a year,jujitsu, three months, modern arnis, three months, jeet kune do concepts, one year,only a very little Tai Chi, and have seen but not practiced only a very little bit of Iron Palm. What turned me away from that path were mainly three things:

1)Many of those things take forever and a day to learn before you can use them effectively enough to cover enough situations in self defense.My main focus to study them in the first place was self defense.I did not care to be strung along when I could need something real and trustworthy that very night if something happened(fortunately nothing yet has ).

2)for every one guy sincerely involved with the metaphysical there are three million who lie about it to make money("stick with me 20 years and I'll show you how to walk on the ceiling" Translation: "Stick around long enough to fill my coffers, kid, and I'll show you my secrets")I ran into one such school which I will not name(that's how dishonest people DESERVE to be remembered)that , I'm ashamed to say, it took me three months to realize they were much smoke and little substance before i ended my dealings with them.Just TOO MANY folks are hollow instructors of halfassed systems that turn to metaphysical jargon to cover up their ineptitude as a way of seeming that their "s**t don't stink",and I'm sure you know the kind I mean.

3)While looking for realistic things to study, I came across folks claiming to revive the old Western Medieval/Renaissance arts.That struck a chord with me: what did MY ancestors do? What is MY martial heritage? So I figured,"OK, let's see what they have and if it makes sense, I've made THAT mistake before" but this was the real deal.And just how I like my arts. Yes these were about practicality, efficiency, even scientific at times(Guess I'm just inclined that way).Haven't looked back since then.

"For example, I have been thrown by my aikido instructor WITHOUT him touching me. I go in for a head strike and BAM! i'm on the floor, i assure you that there was NO contact."

Okay here's where I tell you of the one instance *I* had with something like that, despite everything I just said, that stops me from dismissing it entirely. Someone demostrated to me(I should say ON me) what an Iron Palm strike could do. I recieved a light blow from his palm at a downward angle on my chest.this would look to any observer to be just a tap, and did not travel more than half a foot from beginning to end.But it didn't feel like a tap. the closest thing i can say that it felt like was WEIRD; my knees buckled, and I had to catch myself from falling straight down, my vision blurred for juuuuust a second, and the only way I can describe it is a pulse of energy impacted on my chest and spiraled down through my tailbone.My organs felt wierd, but not painful, and my chest stung a little and i was short of breath for about half a minute after this "tap". I guess it did affect my organs somewhat since for the rest of the night and all next day I mysteriously had diarrhea.I can't explain THAT technique, yet there it was .

"just because there is no scientific explantion KNOWN, doesn't mean there isn't one "

Yeah, but again you can't really call these things common abilities either.

Anyhow, hope the wires are uncrossed and I look forward to talking with you again

Andy

posted 10-23-2000 05:22 PM               

If the battle took place in the thirteenth century, as originally proposed, the Japanese would have a significant advantage. The typical European armies of the time consisted of mailed knights supported by poorly armed peasants. However, by the late fifteenth century, European plate armor had superseded Japanese in protection. More importantly, the commanders knew how to properly use infantry by that time. An army of Swiss pikemen, English longbowmen, and well-equipped heavy cavalry could probably destroy a similary sized Japanese army, no matter what the state of mind of the Japanese soldiers.

posted 10-23-2000 10:26 PM               

Thanks for being a little more diplomatic this time I'm glad we were able to sort out those unfortunate misunderstandings there.

I'm pleased that you don't discount the theory of metaphysical altogether, although i would think that demonstration you spoke of would have convinced you of alternative forces at work.

As to it requiring a person with a special talent to do so i would have to say i disagree. Now keep in mind that this is just my belief from what i've seen and done, but i think that anyone should be able to do these things, provided they are serious about learning. Sure, some people are going to be better at it than others, but that the same with everything right?

I'm intrigued by the iron palm you spoke of, i haven't heard of that particular technique, although it is similiar in some ways to others.

I think the point for me when i ceased to be skeptical toward some of the 'way out' ideas was when you finally are able to do some of it yourself. I can only do some things, nothing outwardly amazing, but ewnough to defy regular logic.

Oh yeah, and i know what you mean about some schools claiming to do some stuff and shit like that, unfortunatly there are quite a few of those around. If you find a good teacher or school however, it opens the door to other schools and teachers who are also honest and legit.

Well, getting back to the actual topic here

Many of the samauri were trained in these skills. I'm sure some discarded them in preference to relying on their physical prowess, but many would not have.

I have a book called 'Secrets of the Samuri'
which basically gives an in depth look at all the the tradtional martial arts of medieval japan. A large portion of this book comes under the section 'Inner factors of Bujutsu'
Which describes use of metaphysical techniques in jujutsu, aikijutsu, kenjutsu, sumo, kyujutsu(bow), kiaijutsu(like yelling at people and paralysing them -- seen this done), and also entails the art of Haragei which was an integral part of many samauri's training.

Now i can only speculate on the implications of this in a duel. It really depends on the people doesn't it? I mean there are various different styles of japanese sword depending on what school was attended. Just as i'm sure there are many different syles and types of equipment in european arts. It is my belief that these abilities of the samurai would give him an edge however, as i think the european arts lack this aspect. I'm sure andy will quickly correct me if i'm wrong on that count however.

As a final note i'd like to say the no-one should criticise any art unless they have studied it extensively and its variants. Everything is good, everything is useful, it all adds to the knowledge bank of moves, styles, concepts etc.

---Ashen-Shugar
---Valheru
---Lord of the Eagle Reaches

posted 10-24-2000 12:00 AM               

As for thew main question here, since there are [presumably] no records of actual confrontations, there is no real way of judging who's the favorite in a fight.

One should be wary of bad logic, also, such as:

In a fight between a submerged WWII sub and a WWII battleship, the odds are in favor of the submarine.

In a fight between a WWII sub-hunting corvette and a submerged WWII sub, odds are in favor of the corvette.

Therefore, in a fight between a WWII corvette and a WWII battleship, the odds are in favor of the corvette.

It's too bad battle reports from the mediaeval peiod are so sorely lacking. The best way of understanding the bits of WWII I've studied, has been reading thousands of pages of condensed battle reports.

posted 10-24-2000 02:54 PM               

One quibble, if I may...

The japanese code of honor and loyalty is famous, as is that of chivalry in the West. Both codes had more flexibility or ambiguity in them than is often realized. In particular, the code of Bushido was reinvented and simplified during the Meiji period, and helped fuel the nationalist/militarist expansion on Japan, leading to WW II. That is what many people are thinking of when they talk about Japanese fighting spirit.

For a Japanese view of Japanese warfare during the Age of Battles, Eiji Yoshikawa's Taiko is informative reading. You may well know it, but for those who don't, a brief rundown is in order(it is a long book). The book traces the rise of Hideyoshi from a humble foot-slogger to lord of Japan. Naturally, the story is full of fighting, but it is also full of politics and manipulation. Daimyo break alliances, vassals surrender castles to the enemy or step aside and let enemy troops pass right under their noses. Sometimes this is for greed, but other times for higher causes (including once "for the greater good of the country"). Several times Hideyoshi recruits neutrals, or even enemies, by humbling himself before them. He convinces touchy generals that their current lord isn't giving them the respect they deserve, and gets them to change sides.

Now, the chivalric code was equally ignored when convenient. At Agincourt, Henry V ordered a massacre of (valuable and disarmed) captured French lords towards the end of the battle, when a few French stragglers raided the English camp. The chivalric code and its medieval trappings were also perverted to some extent by the Nazis. But, no one in the West attributes much real fighting significance to the code of chivalry as such.

posted 11-10-2000 02:07 AM               

Andy, your frustration is very close to home. Ashen, I also understand your annoyance over common western ignorance regarding Japanese explanations for martial phenomenon. Ki or Chi is at the heart of many, many tooth-and-claw arguments between various martial artists.

Ki. Westerners assume it doesn't exist. The Japanese assume Westerners don't use it.

Do I believe in Ki? As was pointed out, I've studied Aikido. I've seen very impressive things done. I've watched many, many demonstrations. I can even do some of the Ki tricks people talk about. Currently I'm studying under a private instructor who's put together stuff from Wing Chun, Tai Chi, Shorin Ryu Karate, Aikido, Woitchi-Do (don't ask) Muay Thai and TKD (Sounds a little out there, I know, but just trust me: this guy can fight). He places a heavy emphasis on... umm... the esoteric, I suppose I'd call it. So...

No, I don't believe in Ki as Oriental culture commonly defines it. But let's qualify that; I think there are human neuromuscular/psychological forces science does not fully understand. Especially psychology, actually. Sort of a subtle variation on the old magic/science debate, replacing science with biology. I also believe in supernatural forces... I'm Christian. I won't get into that here, since I'm not going to change anyone's mind and I have no interest in starting a flame war. Usually this is a seperate issue completely.

Now, as far as my understanding and experience of Ki goes, everyone has "it", and using "it" is a matter of mental processes that any accomplished warrior, most especially those involved in close combat, **will** develop if they fight frequently enough and survive. I know people talk about training Ki and extending Ki and on and on, but in my experience - it's all in how much combat, real or simulated, you've been in. And while I can't prove it, I think Asian martial artists would be shocked at some of the things the old western masters could do.

I can "use Ki" and I don't believe in it. Aikido artists will often talk about how regular people have bursts of time in which they are centered and making full use of their own Ki, but they don't realize it or do it consistently. Well, I think the western warriors did "use Ki" consistently.

The fact is, at this point rational discussion can only go so far, because we are in the realm of the scientifically unprovable... so let's try not to tear eachother's heads off.

If you hurry there's a cool thread on Swordforum related to Ki, under the thread "A question for the kenjutsu students."

Brothers in the Study of the Noble and Worthy Art of Defense...

Elisha Baker
AKA Lance
AKA Shinrael

posted 11-14-2000 05:29 PM               

I have a great love for both western and eastern martial arts. I study eastern arts A) because I like them and B) because there are no serious western groups around here to try.

I likewise enjoy European and Japanese swords greatly. I personally find a good katana to be the most beautiful of all swords. Sadly, I have not been able to see spending very large amounts of money on a sword that will still bend on an incorrect cut against rice mat. I can smack an Angus Trim sword full force against a mat sideways and it'll be okay. And that's $400.

So what I really, REALLY want is a Howard Clark L6 kat. Modern technology, ancient design, some of the most advanced metalurgy available... that is everything a sword should be.

posted 11-14-2000 09:26 PM            

In reguards to your statement about the flexability of your Angus Trim sword compared to Katanas, I agree. I enjoy my Kat but I wouldn't trust it as much as I would my "Tinker" blade. What's really ironic, is that the Katana costs five times as much as the tinker.

posted 11-17-2000 08:25 PM               

Supernatural deals with things above the laws of nature...magical, occult, mystical, etc...

This might seem like word-nazism or nit-picking, but with a written medium accuracy of language is important...plus it just bugs the heck outta me

posted 11-17-2000 09:36 PM            

I agree that accuracy of language is important, but there are some things that are difficult to pin down precisely, and one of them is metaphysics.

Perhaps my little joke earlier didn't help.

What also complicates matters is the fact that folks are trying to grasp Japanese concepts via western language, and this isn't altogether easy.

Metaphysics does mean "after the Physics" in the sense that Andronicus used the term as a title for that part of Aristotle's writings which literally came after the Physics.

But it also signifies, that which comes after, or beyond, the study of those things which relate to external nature. In this sense, we're not far from supernatural.

Aquinas considered it to be concerned with the cognition of God.

I mentioned Kant, who asserted its transcendental province as the science of pure, or a priori, reason.

There have been many other shifts in it's meaning with the philosophical tides.

It first entered the conversation here in Ashen-Shugar's 10/21 post. I can't speak for A-S, but I take metaphysical in this sense to imply the living out of a "metaphysical" view of the world, or cosmology. I think perhaps this is something of a difference in eastern/western philosophy. To generalize, in the west, one "holds" an intellectual view. In the east, one becomes it. (Again, a generalization only).

As far as the "supernatural" aspects (such as putting your opponent down without touching them), I think there are different, but perhaps equally valid ways of looking at this.

Dale Seago recently provided an account over on SwordForum as to how he is able to perform some of these feats as the result of being taught certain ways of moving, diverting the opponent's attention, and capitalizing on human reaction time.

On the other hand, an eastern martial artist, imbued with an experiential "metaphysics", if you will, may feel the flow of chi or ki, directing this "life force" as taught by his "master", but perhaps without being able to articulate the process in what a westerner would regard as "objective" terms.

Who's to say which is the "right" perspective?

posted 11-17-2000 11:36 PM               

please don't think I'm really all that anal about this subject...I'm not. I'm also not a philosophy major with an axe to grind .
It just bothers me when people use metaphysical when they are talking supernatural...the main problem with the word "supernatural" is the almost immediate connection people make with it and witches and magic and the like instead of "beyond or above; of a higher kind" of nature. Of course the meta- suffix also has this as one of its meanings. Looks like I may just be splitting hairs.
But, I think you can agree, that when most people say metaphysics they mean supernatural.
As for your and AS's comments and discussion about metaphysics...I wasn't commenting on the actual meat, just my own little peeve. This has actually been one of the more interesting discussions on the boards recently. A lot of good points and counter points have been made.