Looking for Custom Tambo

ScottUK · Sep 17, 2011

monkeywrench said: ↑

Well, for one thing, can you afford to pay to take more than one art? I can't! haha But that's not the point.
Click to expand...

I think I have made myself clear on 'budo for money' in the past. If a single art was damaging my finances, I would listen to my pocket and consider my path.

Chris Parker said: ↑

I think we've gone about as far as we can, then. On a personal note, I'd just like to say that I'm extremely impressed with how you have been handling yourself in this discussion, it's been a pleasure.
Click to expand...

Seconded - a rare thing these days. Kudos to MW for his behaviour whilst against a lot of conflicting opinion.

monkeywrench · Sep 17, 2011

Chris Parker said: ↑

I think we've gone about as far as we can, then. On a personal note, I'd just like to say that I'm extremely impressed with how you have been handling yourself in this discussion, it's been a pleasure.
Click to expand...

I do agree. It's awkward at best to hash these sorts of things out that are truly best discussed in person with a first aid kit nearby.

And thank you for the personal note. Right back to ya. I think our exchange should be stickied as an example of how to discuss!

monkeywrench · Sep 17, 2011

ScottUK said: ↑

I think I have made myself clear on 'budo for money' in the past. If a single art was damaging my finances, I would listen to my pocket and consider my path.

Seconded - a rare thing these days. Kudos to MW for his behaviour whilst against a lot of conflicting opinion.
Click to expand...

I agree on the "budo for money" thing. CN as an organization is non-profit. And most of our schools are as well. Monthly dues at my school are $50 for individuals. And we'd take that down if we had more students.

I'm very glad for the civil exchange. I've seen people literally come apart under criticism here and at Bullshido over these past few years. Not pretty! MA by its very nature invites criticism and competition. So it's only natural to expect both. The key is to maintain that level of respect, which is one thing I am big on personally and as a MAist.

monkeywrench · Sep 17, 2011

Chris Parker said: ↑

Yeah, it's possible. So I'll attempt more to clarify what I am meaning here, and see how that gels with your experience. I'll use examples where I can as well.

In terms of the use of the term "congruent", that simply means that all the individual parts are working towards the same direction. In terms of power generation, if one form of power generation says you snap in with the hip (karate), and another says you push from the ball of the foot and pivot, without the snapping of the hip (Wing Chun), you can't do both at the same time, so they are incongruent power sources to have. If one power source says you tense your arm (the tendons) to strike, and another says you relax your arm for speed, both are valid, but mutually exclusive. And by taking the mechanics (techniques) from a range of unrelated systems in the way Cuong Nhu says it does then you are getting into this incongruent training methodology.

Well, to get semantic with it then, how about if you're in the ocean? Are you using the ground there, or are you using some other launching pad for your power generation? For the record, before you think I'm being unnecessarily facetious, our traditions do have methods of fighting when in the water in this way...

The ground is not a power source. How you use it (spring off of it, push against it, whatever) is.

When it comes to acceleration, that's just basic physics, really. Force = Mass x Distance x Acceleration/Velocity. How do you achieve your acceleration? I know of a few different methods sworn by in different systems, and they tend to contradict each other, and that'll get more to the core of your actual power source. Mainly because it'll need to match the rest of your power generational concepts, otherwise it's like a rowing team where one or more of the team is rowing in the opposite direction to the rest.

From all reports on the curriculum, which is supported by all the video evidence, the Cuong Nhu syllabus is initially Shotokan Karate, in the form of kata and techniques, with some Wing Chun methods added (but not their forms yet), then adding Judo, Aikido and Tai Chi methods (classing these as "soft" arts), as well as some original forms primarily for weaponry, and some more "soft" forms. After Black Belt, the student is permitted to choose to study things like Wing Chun forms, Vovinam (Vietnamese martial arts, the animal forms seen) etc, again with these taken directly out of the respective systems.

The big problem is that each of the respective systems is unique in it's approach, with Wing Chun and Shotokan being rather contradictory in their approach, power source, tactics, movement, and mechanics, for example. And the big result of this is that the entire system suffers, as compromises are made to accommodate all of the differing approaches, and the resultant confusion gives no basis for the original aspects, such as the weaponry forms. I'll see if I can demonstrate...

CNPREZ29meg.mov - YouTube

The above is a demo clip showing the range and breadth of Cuong Nhu training. Unfortunately, in every area it is deeply lacking. I'm not going to go through the entire clip, but to highlight a few examples:

0:14-0:23 shows a Karate action by attempting to utilise an Aikido "circular" action, and the Karate kicks and strikes are robbed of their power source. The concept of distancing is also way out.

1:29 Shotokan. The forward movement of Shotokan is removed due to the other influences, resulting in off balance movement, constant presentation of their backs, and so on. There is no connection between their hips and their kicks (or any other movement), meaning that there is little in the way of the power that these methods should have. Oh, and they really need to keep their guards up, their heads are way open the entire time.

1:39 Shotokan form. Again, no connection between the hips and the rest of the movement, but because this is the form, the forward movement missing in the sparring section is present. However his weight is way too high, there is no grounding or moving from the hara/tanden, and that results in poor stability for performing or receiving an action.
You might compare that with this clip of Taiji Kase Sensei:

Sensei Taiji Kase - A Shotokan Master - YouTube

Back to the Cuong Nhu clip....

1:50 Boxing. Firstly, I might point out that the Marquis of Queensbury Rules that are the foundation of modern boxing are English, so claiming that Boxing is American is a bit wrong as well. But to critique, the use of a half-karate stance from the Shotokan side of the training is making them slow, compared to an actual boxer, and the punches have none of the kinetic chaining that give boxing punches their power. It isn't just the arms.

2:14 Vovinam. Look, I'm going to be honest here, this just looks like a poor mans Shaolin Animals form without the distinct characters found in that system. Everything seems to lack power and penetration, and that seems to come from a lack of suredness as to what the power source should be. The targeting is fine, and the applications all good, but it is lacking in execution.

2:42 Wing Chun. That's being classed as a "soft" style? Not sure the Chunner's would like that.... To begin with, that form of training exercise looks like a take on Chi Sau combined with the Chain Punching, but missing the point of both. And frankly, the less said about that version of Siu Lim Tao the better... here's another take on it, to get a better idea of how it's meant to work:

Wing Chun - 1st form Siu Lim Tao - YouTube

And back to the Cuong Nhu clip....

3:00 Judo. Again, I wouldn't really class Judo as a "soft" art, no matter the literal translation of "Ju". But the biggest problems here are hallmarks of the karate training again. The entering and kuzushi are far from optimal, and the position that the Uke is in is not being broken sufficiently. As this is a central, fundamental concept to Judo, to miss it is to miss Judo entirely as well.

3:25 Aikido. Again, it's trying to be Karate, and failing to be either. There is no Aikido present at all, and attempting to apply Aikido concepts in this way just doesn't work. There is none of the "softness" that this is supposed to contain in this system (Cuong Nhu), there is no Irimi or Kuzushi again, no use of circular action, and as a result, no Aikido. Just imitation.

3:48 Tai Chi (Taiji). Taiji is far more than just Push Hands exercises, but El Medico has dealt with the issues of whether or not this is Taiji better than I could. I will say that the backwards roll didn't look very "Tai Chi" to me, and the movement back and forth in the Push Hands drill also seemed, uh, off.

I said I wouldn't go through it all, and I won't, but suffice to say that the rest is a mixture of okay karate (not fantastic, or even very good, but okay), and poorly executed and understood weaponry aspects that have already been covered here. The overall feel is of a movie choreographer wanting to put as much into the mix as possible, regardless of the result. That works if it's the Matrix, but not in reality.

This is really just a short highlight of the problems with incongruent power sources and methodologies being thrown in together, which is what I was getting at when I said "just a collection of actions", implying that there isn't the actual art behind them which inform why you use the specific actions you do; they get corrupted and distorted, and the entire system suffers for it.

I think you may be misunderstanding what I am meaning by a "philosophy" here. In all of the documentation that I have come across online about Cuong Nhu there is frequent reference to "philosophy", including "martial philosophy", but it's not what I'm talking about here. The way it appears to be presented in Cuong Nhu is as an idealised construct, a betterment of the lives of those involved and those in contact with them (society at large). That's very laudible, and personally I am all in favour of it, but that's not what I was getting at. In terms of a "martial philosophy", the term seems to be used to refer to the application of strategies (when it's best to avoid conflict, when you should engage etc), which again is very important, but not what I'm meaning.

To give you an idea, there are the Judo philosophies of unbalancing to overwhelm, or yield when being overwhelmed, or the Wing Chun philosophies of protecting the centre line, and a straight line being the fastest way to a target. Then there's the Karate philosophy of solidity to power your strikes, and direct forward movement in the footwork (Wing Chun tends to not have that as such a high feature, and their footwork reflects a different philosophy again), and none of these fit the Aikido philosophy of non-resistance to force and redirection of an incoming attacks energy.

Unfortunately, for the reasons I've mentioned, that just doesn't work. From an unconscious level, you won't have the ability to decide which range you're in and therefore which method you should use, you will simply always go to the one that is unconsciously recognised or identified as the most powerful. In other words, whether it's against a group, one-on-one, a weapon, close quarters, or from a distance, you'll use the same responce set. The rest really is a waste of time and energy.

According to the online sources, it's an option after Black Belt, so while it was done for a demo, it's still part of the teachings of the system, apparently coming from the Vovinam heritage, which itself dates from the mid-20th Century.

As far as "perfect is the enemy of good", I understand what that phrase refers to (which is the pitfall of looking so hard for perfection that you try to skip over being good in the first place, and therefore never attain anything like the perfection you are seeking), but that is not the case here, I'd say. In fact, I'd suggest that the very concept of Cuong Nhu epitomises the "seeking perfection" aspect: by trying to put in so many aspects and cover so much, the entire system suffers being mediocre at best.
Click to expand...

One thing I did mean to mention is the whole "hard" "soft" thing. This story should cover it I think.

One Friday, the instructor leading the class asked for requests for the first half of class. I knew he loved "hard" style, so I said "let's do some soft style." So we did! We hit the mats and did a lot of Judo stuff. I came away bloody, with a ripped gi and was *completely* winded at the end of it. My comment as I hauled myself off the mat was "whoever said Judo is "soft" is full of it!" That incited a riot of laughing.

Chris Parker · Sep 17, 2011

Ha! You know what, I think a lot of that comes down to context... 'JU' (柔) can be translated as "soft", "gentle" or similar, but the context is rather different. It implies not meeting force with force directly, and the concept of "yielding" is more accurate, but I tend to look at it as more an art of momentum... yours, or your opponents!

Pat OMalley · Sep 19, 2011

I watched the videos again and again and read the discussion with interest and all I can say is I have guys who have only been training for a month or so in double weapons who would be able to pick some serious holes in that. No offense here but what it looks like to me is that age old addage of some other art becomes popular in the movies and in the public eye with documentaries etc and all of a sudden other arts say 'Oh yeah, we do that too, but we have not shown it yet'.

I have no gripe with other arts borrowing from each other, hell thats how arts evolve and improve, I just wish they would study the part they are borrowing properly before adding it in, otherwise they simply leave themselves wide open for people to make assumptions based on a small portion of what they do, and that assumption usually ends up being that the whole art is as bad as the portion they have not mastered.

I would advise they look and train with other systems that specialise in such weapons first to get a better understanding of how it should be done as opposed to how pretty it looks, and never to assume that those systems that do specialise in it only work one area, eg. Close range, as you can rest assured if they really study their weapon they will know how to use it in all ranges against single and multiple armed and unarmed opponents.

The politest thing I can say about the clips is they look pretty and thats about it, as for having a use? Only against someone who's not actually looking.

Best regards

Pat

monkeywrench · Sep 19, 2011

Chris Parker said: ↑

Ha! You know what, I think a lot of that comes down to context... 'JU' (柔) can be translated as "soft", "gentle" or similar, but the context is rather different. It implies not meeting force with force directly, and the concept of "yielding" is more accurate, but I tend to look at it as more an art of momentum... yours, or your opponents!
Click to expand...

I missed this post! It came in when I was posting myself.

Yes, we have this discussion about "soft" from time to time. Context is everything.

Pat OMalley said: ↑

I watched the videos again and again and read the discussion with interest and all I can say is I have guys who have only been training for a month or so in double weapons who would be able to pick some serious holes in that. No offense here but what it looks like to me is that age old addage of some other art becomes popular in the movies and in the public eye with documentaries etc and all of a sudden other arts say 'Oh yeah, we do that too, but we have not shown it yet'.

I have no gripe with other arts borrowing from each other, hell thats how arts evolve and improve, I just wish they would study the part they are borrowing properly before adding it in, otherwise they simply leave themselves wide open for people to make assumptions based on a small portion of what they do, and that assumption usually ends up being that the whole art is as bad as the portion they have not mastered.

I would advise they look and train with other systems that specialise in such weapons first to get a better understanding of how it should be done as opposed to how pretty it looks, and never to assume that those systems that do specialise in it only work one area, eg. Close range, as you can rest assured if they really study their weapon they will know how to use it in all ranges against single and multiple armed and unarmed opponents.

The politest thing I can say about the clips is they look pretty and thats about it, as for having a use? Only against someone who's not actually looking.

Best regards

Pat
Click to expand...

It truly is hard to make these types of determinations on just a handful of videos for several reasons. I can say that yes study and training of other arts is indeed encouraged and does happen. We have instructors (of all ranks) that also run schools in other styles including MMA, Judo, Aikido, Kendo, etc. CN greatly encourages cross training.

As for the specific comments you make about the double stick work, I will have to reserve a response until I have actually swung two sticks myself! lol
I will most likely revive this thread from the dead in the next year or so.

Pat OMalley · Sep 20, 2011

monkeywrench said: ↑

I missed this post! It came in when I was posting myself.

Yes, we have this discussion about "soft" from time to time. Context is everything.

It truly is hard to make these types of determinations on just a handful of videos for several reasons. I can say that yes study and training of other arts is indeed encouraged and does happen. We have instructors (of all ranks) that also run schools in other styles including MMA, Judo, Aikido, Kendo, etc. CN greatly encourages cross training.

As for the specific comments you make about the double stick work, I will have to reserve a response until I have actually swung two sticks myself! lol
I will most likely revive this thread from the dead in the next year or so.
Click to expand...

Cross training is great not only for knowledge of other arts but also to improve your own too. And yes I am making assumptions on the video footage provided, but thats all I have to go on and to be honest it looks more like turning the frog into a Prince as opposed to having any practical use. I would suggest looking into the Thai, Filipino and Western Weapons fighting systems and the Japanese and Chinese weapons systems, groups that specialise in weapons combat and even though they may have a lot of differences they have one thing in common if done correctly, no waisted advertised movements which is all I have seen in the video clips provided.

Swining two sticks? Yep it certainly is that, using two sticks correctly both as a form of combat and from the art side of it (which is also combat) it certainly is not I'm affraid.

Sorry but I am only basing my opinions after 30 years of specialising in weapons and mainly in double weapons which is my favorite area.

I am also a bit weary when I hear things like 'Only the instructor can tell us if the weapon is the correct size for me'. Yes there are certain aspects and rough rules to sizes for many weapons catagories but chosing a weapon for size and weaight is actually a personal thing, the instructor should be able to give you a rough guide, but you will eventually learn to find something that fits you and that you are more effective with within the range of weapons being used.

And basing my opinions on the video clips offered I would say the instructor also needs to learn a little more about double stick applications as this is certainly not that, but rather looks more like a demonstration from an irrate Morris Dancer.

Best regards

Pat

Pat OMalley · Sep 20, 2011

Chris Parker said:

2:42 Wing Chun. That's being classed as a "soft" style? Not sure the Chunner's would like that.... To begin with, that form of training exercise looks like a take on Chi Sau combined with the Chain Punching, but missing the point of both. And frankly, the less said about that version of Siu Lim Tao the better... here's another take on it, to get a better idea of how it's meant to work:
Click to expand...

The Video clip you put on page 4 with the so called Wing Chun, the drill the where doing was actually a bad version of Hubud from FMA and not Wing Chun, although the principles are similar in that Hubud is a sensitivity drill and an entry it is not Chi Sau and looks nothing like Chi Sau, that in its self made me very doubtfull of that actual claims of this system in that they seem to be plucking what they thought where some movements from another system but had no real understanding of the other systems they say they use.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCWJVX7wzV8"]CNPREZ29meg.mov - YouTube[/ame]

At 5:48 the single stick drill we see is a very bad version of FMA's Box Pattern (Sumbrada Drill) and at 7:48 the person defending against multiple attackers with weapons is to put it bluntly DEAD... From looking at the single and double stick portions of the video and the so called Wing Chun drill which is actually a bad version of an FMA drill, I would safely say the person who added this in to the curiculum has seen some FMA videos (because it is in vogue) and copied them missing the whole essance of what they are used for and how they are applied.

Best regards

Pat

Pat OMalley · Sep 20, 2011

I also Googled Tambo and this is what I found.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tambo_(weapon)

Dont sound anything like the OP described or what is in the OP's video's. Again makes me wonder if the instructor who included it has actualy any expeariance in the weapon it's self or is simply assuming movements and doing what he thinks it right?

Surely a 32 inch stick would be more akin to a Jo as opposed to what a Tambo/Tanjo is described as being around 18 inches in length???

Best regards

Pat

Chris Parker · Sep 20, 2011

Hi Pat,

Yeah, I saw the Hubud similarities, but as it was labeled as "Wing Chun" in the clip, I was looking to what from WC it could be related to. The punching is very much Wing Chun (or an approximation, at least), and Chi Sau was the closest WC drill I could think of to what was being shown.

With regards to the Tambo size in relation to a Jo or some other, Jo simply means "stick", but typically is used to refer to an approximately 4 foot weapon (50"); there is another item referred to in some systems as a Hanbo (literally: half staff), which is approximately 3 feet (36"), then you have Tanbo ("short staff"), which could be almost anything from a few inches to two feet or slightly over. Then there's weapons referred to as "Tanjo", similar to the Tanbo, but a different term used in some systems. I would suggest that the term is borrowed from Japanese terminology, the same as the ranking and other aspects, rather than being the specific weapon found in some Japanese systems.

Chris Parker · Sep 20, 2011

Hmm, double post... now how did that happen?

Pat OMalley · Sep 20, 2011

Chris Parker said: ↑

Hi Pat,

Yeah, I saw the Hubud similarities, but as it was labeled as "Wing Chun" in the clip, I was looking to what from WC it could be related to. The punching is very much Wing Chun (or an approximation, at least), and Chi Sau was the closest WC drill I could think of to what was being shown.
Click to expand...

which just reinforces the fact that all they are doing is plucking a few drills from other arts they have no understanding of. I think they have watched a JKD Kali video and assumed that because there is a WC base in it that the drill must be from Wing Chun? research before plagiarism is always a wise move. And they didn't do that. Quite frankly I would be asking for my money back.

Best regards

Pat

monkeywrench · Sep 20, 2011

Pat OMalley said: ↑

Cross training is great not only for knowledge of other arts but also to improve your own too. And yes I am making assumptions on the video footage provided, but thats all I have to go on and to be honest it looks more like turning the frog into a Prince as opposed to having any practical use. I would suggest looking into the Thai, Filipino and Western Weapons fighting systems and the Japanese and Chinese weapons systems, groups that specialise in weapons combat and even though they may have a lot of differences they have one thing in common if done correctly, no waisted advertised movements which is all I have seen in the video clips provided.

Swining two sticks? Yep it certainly is that, using two sticks correctly both as a form of combat and from the art side of it (which is also combat) it certainly is not I'm affraid.

Sorry but I am only basing my opinions after 30 years of specialising in weapons and mainly in double weapons which is my favorite area.

I am also a bit weary when I hear things like 'Only the instructor can tell us if the weapon is the correct size for me'. Yes there are certain aspects and rough rules to sizes for many weapons catagories but chosing a weapon for size and weaight is actually a personal thing, the instructor should be able to give you a rough guide, but you will eventually learn to find something that fits you and that you are more effective with within the range of weapons being used.

And basing my opinions on the video clips offered I would say the instructor also needs to learn a little more about double stick applications as this is certainly not that, but rather looks more like a demonstration from an irrate Morris Dancer.

Best regards

Pat
Click to expand...

Yes, personalization is a factor. Weight and so on is left up to the individual. It's the length and width that have guidelines.

ap Oweyn · Sep 20, 2011

Length and width have guidelines, but the weight is up to you?

What about material? Because if you're all using the same material (e.g., rattan) and length and width are being determined for you, it seems like weight won't have much personalization to it either.

Honestly, mate, they're just sticks. Get a rough sense for the length from someone your height in class then order a pair online.

Smitfire · Sep 21, 2011

Compare and contrast.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WoMgotN90I"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WoMgotN90I[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G10jg28t2AI"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G10jg28t2AI[/ame]

One looks like he'd drop the weapon if he tried to hit someone with it.
The other looks like he'd take your head clean off. Even with a stick.
One understands combative footwork, angles, power generation, combinations and flow.
The other...erm...erm...well...he can remember what move comes next.
One has used what he's doing against someone trying to do the same to him.
The other has not.
I don't see the point in doing something badly when there are so clearly others doing it so much better?
If I wanted to swing a stick then it'd have to be something pretty amazing to make me NOT do some form of FMA. And this Cuong-nhu just isn't amazing.

Although I give this thread a thumbs up for that snake form where the guy looks for all the world like he's wafting a fart away.

monkeywrench · Sep 21, 2011

ap Oweyn said: ↑

Length and width have guidelines, but the weight is up to you?

What about material? Because if you're all using the same material (e.g., rattan) and length and width are being determined for you, it seems like weight won't have much personalization to it either.

Honestly, mate, they're just sticks. Get a rough sense for the length from someone your height in class then order a pair online.
Click to expand...

That's what I did!

And to settle the CN effectivness topic once and for all, I present...NINJAS!
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJr7MCSQotk&feature=share"]Cuong Nhu Movie - YouTube[/ame]

Pat OMalley · Sep 21, 2011

ap Oweyn said: ↑

Length and width have guidelines, but the weight is up to you?

What about material? Because if you're all using the same material (e.g., rattan) and length and width are being determined for you, it seems like weight won't have much personalization to it either.

Honestly, mate, they're just sticks. Get a rough sense for the length from someone your height in class then order a pair online.
Click to expand...

To be honest here mate I dont think it matters as from what I have seen they dont seem to know how to use them anyway and that's my honest opinion. They also dont seem to know which art they are taking from either as I see bad FMA being sold as Wing Chun? And bad FMA be sold as Kung Fu Weapons? But if the OP is happy doing it, thats good for him. Me personally I want to know what I am getting is the real deal and not just something added for the sake of popularity.

Best regards

Pat

Pat OMalley · Sep 21, 2011

monkeywrench said: ↑

That's what I did!

And to settle the CN effectivness topic once and for all, I present...NINJAS!
Cuong Nhu Movie - YouTube
Click to expand...

WTF????? Are you sure???

Sorry but I fell asleep waiting for the Ninjers to actually attack properly and fell asleep again waiting for the defender to complete each defensive move.

Come on you cant be serious, If you beleive this is effective, no offence your guys need to get out in the real world, I have guys who have only been training with me a couple of months would look lightning fast compared to these guys and would be a dam sight more effective, As for my black belts, well comparing them to these guys in the video my guys would be so fast you guys would'nt see them move and I consider my guys to be reasonable fighters..

Please tell me your joking???

Best regards

Pat

Pat OMalley · Sep 21, 2011

So compare what you think weapons are all about and what they really are about

http://youtu.be/RJr7MCSQotk

http://youtu.be/z6kgr7yekLA

Difference between them would'nt you say???

Best regards

Pat

Log in or Sign up

Looking for Custom Tambo

ScottUK More human than human...

monkeywrench Valued Member

monkeywrench Valued Member

monkeywrench Valued Member

Chris Parker Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

monkeywrench Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

Chris Parker Valued Member

Chris Parker Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

monkeywrench Valued Member

ap Oweyn Ret. Supporter

Smitfire Cactus Schlong

monkeywrench Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Looking for Custom Tambo

ScottUK More human than human...

monkeywrench Valued Member

monkeywrench Valued Member

monkeywrench Valued Member

Chris Parker Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

monkeywrench Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

Chris Parker Valued Member

Chris Parker Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

monkeywrench Valued Member

ap Oweyn Ret. Supporter

Smitfire Cactus Schlong

monkeywrench Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

Pat OMalley Valued Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches