SKH Quest & Hatsumi's Bujinkan

Unless he's just trying to completely empty his voluminous basket of red herring, a task doomed to failure because it is a magic basket which continually replenishes itself, he appears to be trying to argue that SKH could have learned the Shobukyoku system he teaches via direct transmission rather than from a Genbukan video, hypothesizing that Takamatsu sensei may have taught it to Tanemura sensei during Tanemura's years of training with Takamatsu; and that Tanemura, while he was still in the Bujinkan, may then have taught it to SKH.

 

OH! LOL!

 

Dale Seago posted

About half way right. What I am saying is

1/ If one were to ask Mr Tanemura if he learnt Kuji No Ho from Dr Hatsumi, the answer is probably likely to be NO. Why? Well simply that Tanemura seems to disenvow any knowledge of what hatsumi taught him. Including Menkyo to several schools. His line seems to be that he learnt it all from Sato Kimbei, Kimura and others.

2/ If Takamatsu knew the Kuji No Ho, and Hatsumi said that he was taught everything by Takamatsu then it follows, unless Koshira made up the Kuji No Ho, that either Hatsumi is lying, or Takamatsu did not teach him everything.

3/ That if as some early reports that Tanemura state tha he trained with Takamatsu more than one day, or at least has led us to believe that as Ben Coles post points out then its not imposiible that Tanemura learnt it from Takamatsu.

However if as George Kohler pointed out that Tanemura only trained with Takamatsu for one day, why does he act like he's his teacher. I spent more than one day training with Hatsumi. I'm sure there would be hell to pay here if I only trained with Hatsumi a few times and called him my teacher and had him in my web site.

So to the question of who taught Mr Hayes the Kuji No Ho, I just don't know but its certain that we cannot take things by what is said because when one talks about the origins of who taught what to who, and when, then there are some real inconsistencies.

In other words, and I hope this does not offend people, butTanemura says he learnt the Kuji No Ho from Kimbei. Now you Bujinkan guys out there might say OK thats good enough. But then I think you also have to accept that Tanemura did not learn much from Hatsumi, and that Tanemura is the real soke of Gikan Ryu, and that Hatsumi went on bended knee to apologise to Kimbei about his false claim.

Posted by George Kohler
http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26323&page=3&pp=15&highlight=tanemura

In other words if you accept some of what tanemura is saying you have to accept all of it.



Gary Arthur

 

Your attempt to divert attention and make up a new history has some big holes. Mainly that Hatsumi sensei has never made mention of the Kuji no Ho AFAIK and Sato Kimbei seems to have not only taught it to Tanemura sensei, but given him documentation. So your theory that Hatsumi sensei taught it and Tanemura sensei is misrepresenting the source holds no water.

Yes, Koshira made up the Kuji No Ho is the key. Koshira did create the Kuji no ho. This has to be the third or fourth time this has been mentioned.

Except that one of Takamatsu's students created the Kuji no Ho after leaving Takamatsu sensei so there is no way anyone really could have learned it from Takamatsu sensei.

So, is everyone else besides Garth convinced that Steve learned it off of a video? Until we get a straight answer from Steve instead of all this wild speculation from Garth, that seems to be the most likely explination.

 

It strikes me as ironic that garth is asking/posting to the effect that RVD learned it from video, but doesn't think that SKH learned it from video. You don't get your cake and get to eat it too.

 

Garth,
I thought you had an anthropology background? Obviously, you didn't learn a thing in researching (i.e. using primary and secondary resources). What a waste of college money.

Here is a quote from an interview of Tanemura Sensei in a Martial Arts Journal.

"* What was your rank when you left Mr. Hatsumi's Bujinkan organization?
I was the Vice-President of bujinkan and had received menkyo kaiden diplomas, scrolls, and densho, from Mr. Hatsumi."

[Ronald L. Holt, Ph.D. Shoto Tanemura Discusses The Roots Of Modern Ninpo. (1996). Journal of Asian Martial Arts, Vol 5 Number 1, 72-77.]

This just shows that you don't have any knowledge of what you speak of.

Your quote here, "unless Koshiro made up the Kuji No Ho" shows that you should do more "research." It is well established that Kiba Koshiro developed the Shobukyoku Seitei Kata.

[Kodo Senyokai Shobukyoku and the Teachers. (2000). Retrieved November, 12, 2006, from http://www.shinjin.co.jp/kuki/hyoho/history05_e.htm ]

You acknowledged earlier in this thread that you were Mr. Hayes spokesman http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1011378&postcount=546
So why don't you ask Mr. Hayes where he learned the Shobukyoku Seitei Kata?

 

Another beer and some popcorn for me please. And whatever George Kohler is drinking, put it on my tab.

Anyone want to have a friendly little pool on what tactic Garth will use next? There are so many things he could do other than ask Steve and get us an answer we could check that there should be several openings.

I suspect that he will continue to attack Tanemura sensei and George Kohler. It seems that a good conspiracy against Steve is a popular tacitic among the kool aid drinkers in Toshindo. But maybe he will take another stance. Anyone want to predict what he will do other than get us the version from Steve and proof?

And the glorious irony is that none of us would have thought to ask about the Kuji no Ho and how Steve could be teaching it if Garth himself had not brought up the subject in this thread in post #620. George Kohler would never have stepped in and we would never have known just how much it looks like Steve is teaching something from someone else's video Garth not brought up the subject.

 

But you play such an expert on MAP.

 

OK OK
Unless I am mistaken the whole thrust of this thread seems to be about where Mr Hayes learnt the Shobukyoku stuff from. And we seem to have hit this idea that it could only have been Tanemura as he is the only one trained in Shobukyoko gata bojutsu, and that was after Mr Tanemura left the Bujinkan.

So Grimjack has suggested that because of this Mr Hayes must have copied the DVD because the Shobukyoku stuff is not known by Hatsumi or his other seniors.

As I put

John Lidsay posted

Now in this regard the first sentence is interesting.

And I believe that maybe true. Maybe it is not taught in the Bujinkan anymore, but it does not mean that it was at one point not taught. Remember Mr Hayes was in the Hombu before the Bujinkan ever came about.

Now Dale Seago came close when he said about me

Yep thats it. Thats what I am talking about "Direct Transmission" from one of the Shihan, not necesarily Tanemura. But lets stick with the Tanemura idea for now.

Now Grimjack posted

Correct, Dr Hatsumi does not seem to have mentioned it. But absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Grimjack continues

Really. You see the problem is in who you believe.

You see in this regard Tanemura is being held up as a reliable source even though of course there is Ben Coles post to the contrary. But lets go with the fact that Tanemura is completely truthful. Then we have to also accept the fact that as George Kohler pointed out

You cannot pick and choose what you wish to believe. If Tanemura is a reliable source he is a reliable source and you need to accept everything he says as true. So if you believe that Tanemura learnt the Shobukyoku from Sato Kimbei then you also have to accept that Hatsumi IS NOT a Gikan Ryu Soke.

Now actually I think personally that this Shobukyoku is pretty well known in the Bujinkan and Tanemura has probably seen it before he met Sato Kimbei. Possible Sato Kimbei gave him some secret points about the art, but it was known by Hatsumi and some of the seniors.

Of course we also have realise that Mr Tanemura has almost NO mention of Dr Hatsumi on his web site, so regardless of the magazine that George Kohler pointed out, I still think that there is a lack of credit to what Mr Tanemura learnt from Dr Hatsumi. After all he was with him for what at least ten years.

However lets return to the point about Shobukyoku in the Bujinkan.

This appeared on E-Budo on page 1 called Tatara preview. I Quote

From John Lindsey

So Takamatsu constructed the Shobukyoku school then, which of course includes the Kuji No Bo.

Then surely he would have passed this on to Hatsumi. After all Takamatsu taught Hatsumi all he knows.

Now this is from "Kukishin Ryu Bijutsu-www.ezboard.com
Question

Did he just say Shobukyoku stuff in a Hanbojutsu book by Hatsumi. So does Hatsumi know Shobukyoku?

Now heres George Kohlers reply which i have edited out the niceties at the beggining and some of the stuff at the end but what is important is this paragraph when he says

So are we saying here that Hatsumi Sensei does know Shobukyoku stuff. Its not a stretch of the imagination then that if he knows the hanbo, it follows he also knows the jo/bo too.

Oh and by the way I never said Mr Hayes lerant the Kuji No Bo from Tanemura. I said Hatsumi or one of the Shihan and I also said that maybe this Shobukyoku stuff is pretty well known and not just by Tanemura.

So maybe Mr Hayes did not learn it from a DVD. And of course if one views the disc, one can see that if Mr Hayes had copied them from the DVD he would have called the Dai Ippo, Dai Niho. when in fact he calls them something else. But then most people here have not seen these discs have they?

Gary Arthur

 

Because someone is a reliable source you have to accept EVERYTHING they say as true? This is a logical fallacy.

 

Boy this is fun. Back in post #620 Garth was taking this position.

Now of course, Garth is throwing out the theory that Soke did learn the kata, but just has never, ever mentioned it to anyone. It is amazing just how quickly Garth can change his position.

But the easiest theory to believe is that Steve picked up the video, maybe the book, and taught out of it. Garth's theory makes the story behind the DaVinci code sound simple. If Garth would ask Steve, and we could confirm what Steve says, we would have something else to believe. But since Garth seems rather unwilling to take the time away from posting theories here of how Steve might have learned the Kuji no Ho to actually ask him, we will have to continue with the belief that he got his knowledge from videos.

 

Grimjack posted

We began with the argument that Mr Hayes could not have learnt the Kuji No Bo from Hatsumi because he does not know the Shobukyoko stuff and therefore he must have learnt it from the DVDs. Or that was your proof.

Yet now we have some good sources that Dr Hatsumi does know the Shobukyoku kata, you want to dismiss that evidence and continue with you campaign by stating

Just because its the easiest. Well at least for you, it does not mean its the truth.

Anyone looking at this thread can see how you are just making blind allegations.

At the end of the day I have shown that Dr Hatsumi does know the Shobukyoku gata's and therefore it is possible that Mr Hayes learnt it from Hatsumi Sensei.

Until you can prove otherwise your argument carries no weight.

Actually I have. But if you want to know the truth then maybe you should contact him.

Gary Arthur

 

Umm...Where did we see this happen?
I just re-read the last ten pages and I haven't seen what you refer to in them..Did you prove it before that?
Or is this more of your belief in your own conviction? I can't see the post where this was proven...Any help?
Regards.

 

Portus 2002 posted

Good point and I understand where you are coming from, as i'm sure you know whwre i'm coming from.

Of course you do not have to accept everything or anything a person says, regardless of how reliable they have been in the past. But if they have been relaible in the past then its less likely that what they are saying now is not true.

Let me try to put this in perspective.

I have a friend called Y. Y is prone to wild exageration. Y is deeply involved in ritual magic and has told me that he has met the devil and sat down to tea with him. On acouple of occasions he has told me things that I know are not true. On one occasion he told me that he was Caligula in a former life and played his fiddle when Rome burnt. Well we all know the story that it was Nero and the fiddle story is a falacy.

So do I believe anything Y says. Well yes. If Y tells me that the grass is green, I would believe him. If he told me that his mum is ill I might believe him, but if he told me that whilst on holiday in Scotland the loch ness monster stpped in front of his car and by using his magical ability he managed to read the monsters psychic thoughts, well I might not call my friend a liar, but I might raise a little smile.

Now I have another friend called Z. Z is a man in his 70s who cannot stand the sight of blood. Then one day whilst watching a war film he tells myself and his friends that during the war he served in the SAS. For years people thought that Z was prone to exageration until the day I go around his house and he gets out all his documentation and photographs and there he is wearing an SAS badge, photos of him in the desert serving with the LRDG, and medals that he has. So next time when Z tells me something regardless of how strange it might seem, I tend to have the opinion that I will believe him until he is proven wrong, unless of course based on my own knowledge I know its a lie.

So when it comes to what someone has told us, its based a lot on faith.
When my girlfriend tells me that she had a bad day at work, I don't say "prove it", because I have never known my girlfriend to lie.

So when my girlfriend phoned me at work and told me that two planes had just crashed into the world trade towers I did not say "Yeh sure" I took her at her word. But when I trurned around to address the 25 adults I was lecturing and informed them what had happened, some even started laughing and said that i was having a laugh with them. Until of course i switched on the TV.

Why did they do that. Probably for a couple of reasons. Firstly that its unthinkable, but also because they had only met me that morning and did not know how truthful I was or what kind of person I was.

So much of what we believe is based on faith, in relation to how truthful we have found that person to be in the past.

Lets take Mr Tanemura. Tanemura comes across as a very truthful individual although there are a couple of things that I might query about some of his claims, and of course not forgetting how he was spoken to by a divine being to restart the Hakuun Ryu whilst he was on a flight.

So is Mr Tanemura a relaible source?

Well I guess thats based on your frame of reference and what you believe. Personally I think the airplane story is a bit of a joke and a bit of a get out for how he can find justification in starting a new ryu. But i'm sure my friend Mr Y would believe it.

Now i'm sure that a lot of people knowing Mr Tanemura will take what he says at face value because he has always been truthful to them. Now we could ask him to prove all that he says, but he can't, no more than we can ask a Christian to prove God, But then neither can i prove that god does not exist.

Or that that theres not a, in Richard Dawkins words a spaghetti monster that orbits the earth. You can tell me that i'm lying but you can never prove me wrong.

Now this is the same with this argument about where Mr Hayes learnt the Shobukyoku. Mr Hayes we know knows it because its on his DVDs. Although anyone that cares to take a look will see that actually it is different to the way thet Tanemura shows them in his DVDs.

Ever seen the Genbukan Sabaki Gata and Hatsumi's Sabaki Gata and compared the two. One can see that they are the same kata, but they are radically different. I fact in some cases very different. It is the same too with the SKH DVD on the Kuji No bo. One can see that Mr Hayes has nor just copied the DVDs, but then few here seem to have seen both to compare.

Now this whole argument was about the fact that Mr Hayes could not have learnt the Shobukyoku from anyone else but Tanemura because its not part of the Bujinkan. So I put

See I put shown, NOT PROVED.

Fifth Chamber replied

Now as i said I did not say proved.

By showing I mean that a few people i.e George Kohler being one stating about how the Hanbojutsu book contains Shobukyoku stuff.

And in fact if one looks at the Kiba Koshira book, one can immediately identify that the patterns in Dr Hatsumis hanbo book are identical to the ones in that book.

Now I go back to my original point about who we believe. If we accept George as a good source of information then theres every reason that we should accept what he says is true, and therefore those poeple who have stated that Mr Hayes could only have learnt Shobukyoku from Tanemura as according to them he is the only one that knows it are proably wrong. On the other hand if we don't agree with Mr Kohler and others then we are back to square one.

Fifth Chamber continues

Yep I guess your right there. Mr Hayes has shown me no reason for me to doubt him. In my mind Mr Hayes is a trust worthy person. Although based on their own convictions, even though few have ever met the man, let alone trained with him, some might think he is a liar.

And of course they are well within their right to do so. But the question is can they prove it?

How does one prove that one learnt what one learnt when. If you have had some leassons with a master instructor at his house away from the dojo, how do you prove that.

I had some training in a park in Swindon from Mr Hayes back in 1996 on the finer points of kamae whilst we were waiting for BBC Swindon. Can I prove it?

No of course I can't, but never can you disprove it.

So the starnge logic we have on the boards goes like this.

An question is thrown out, as an example "Where did Mr Hayes learn Mushadori"

So I contact Mr Hayes and he says "Oh Mr Z taught it to me when we went to Iga once"

So now the detractors say "Prove it"

Well I can't and neither can Mr Hayes.

So the detractors say "Well OK then Mr Hayes must be lying"

Its a little like a police officer arresting a black guy because a burglary has been commited in his area. Because he is a racist police officer he believes all the blacks commit the crimes.

So he questions the black guy and asks "Where were you this evening"

The black guy says "I was at home on my own watching TV"

The police officer says "Prove it"

Well of course he can't

"Aha says the police officer so your lying, and therefore must have committed the crime.

Now of course this is ludicrous but is the kind of thing we get here on the forums. In other words someone is a liar until they can prove otherwise, which a lot of time they cannot.

As Grimjack puts

The easiest theory is also to believe that the world was created in seven days by God as millions of people do, rather than by the complicated reason of evolution. But it does not mean that Evolution is wrong or that creationism is right.

So what are we left with. OK we know that possibly that Mr Hatsumi knows some of the Shobukyoku because as George Kohler and others have pointed out its in his book, and one can also look at the Kiba Koshira book and see them there.

Does this disprove that Mr Hayes did not learn the kata from a DVD?

Of course it doesn't, but because of the holes in the evidence i.e that only Mr Tanemura knows the Shobukyoku, it does not prove it either.

Sure we can go along with the easiest option and that it down to you. but it is not PROOF.

Gary Arthur

 

Regardless of all the waffle Garth, bottom line is that Steve does not have permission to use the Ryu-ha name, regardless of where YOU think the techniques come from.

You yourself said that you would not do this ie using Toshindo name/brand but you are making excuses for Steve as to why its ok for him to do so because maybe its because its this etc etc etc

So how about a simple its out of order and move on, I'm sure steve is aware of this issue as I'm sure he is aware of all the others. And i'm sure IF he was bothered he could have done something about it by now.

Or tell you want I'll start running off some Toshindo Grading certs and start selling them on ebay and lets see where that goes...

 

Makes me glad I have an intellimouse with scroll feature. Saves time clicking on the scroll bar and dragging.

 

Saru 1968 posted

Good point and lets put this into perspective.

Lets say for a moment that what Grimjack is saying is true i.e that Mr Hayes did learn the bojutsu kata from Mr Tanemuras DVDs and that the Shobukyoku kata are not part of the Bujinkan.

Well then I guess it should be Mr Tanemura that should be annoyed, But we have heard nothing from the Genbukan camp.

So now lets say that Grimjack is wrong and Mr Hayes did learn the Kata from Hatsumi and the Shobukyoku is part of the Bujinkan, then one can understand why Dr Hatsumi is annoyed.

But then on the other hand why should he be?
As many have pointed out. Mr Hayes has not been a member of the Bujinkan for years. So why is Hatsumi annoyed?

Is Mr Hayes using the words Kukishinden Happo Biken?

No he's not. Its says Kukishinden.

So why is Hatsumi getting annoyed?

The truth is that I bet Dr Hatsumi has not got a clue about whats on those DVDs that Mr Hayes put out, and I would bet that Mr Richard Van Donk doesn't either. Because anyone watching the DVDs would say "Hold on a moment. this isn't Bujinkan stuff. Where did he get that from?

But they havent. They have written to Hatsumi telling him that Mr Hayes is teaching Bujinkan material. But according to some it isn't.

Or is as I put before. Grimjack is wrong and it is.

You see its only the Bujinkan making a fuss about this. Nothing from Mr Tanaka, Mr Tanemura or the Kukishin family.

As some have pointed out Mr Hayes has been out of the Bujinkan for years so why does it bother Hatsumi. Or are the ties with Hatsumi stronger than we imagined?

I did not say its OK. But it is interesting that Dr Hatsumi has just taken the plaque off the wall and it is now in a drawer (not in the bin), and certificates are still being sent out to Mr Hayes. Strange that.

Well you might be taken to court and sued, as I am sure Dr Hatsumi could have had Mr Hayes in court. But he has not done that, nor issued any official statements to say what his opinion is, and continues to issue certification.

Although some will obviously say that taking the plaque off the wall says everthing. But actually it just says that Dr Hatsumi had to be seen to take some action, and that is all he has done. Personally i don't think Dr Hatsumi is bothered.

In regard to Mr Hayes you put

Then maybe he isn't bothered, or at least by the opinions of people on the forums.

Gary Arthur

 

I simply become amazed by your ability to twist logic into a pretzel.

 

For anyone confused by the snow job Garth is putting on, let me lay out the facts. The parts in red are the facts that Garth wants you to forget because they destroy his version of events.

Takamatsu sensei set up a curriculum for a group called the Shobukyoku that included stick fighting techniques.

Takamatsu sensei taught Hatsumi sensei everything he knew and that included what he created for the Shobukyoku.

The hanbo kata for the Shobukyoku can be found in the book "Stick Fighting" by Hatsumi soke.

A student of Takamatsu sensei in the Shobukyoku by the name of Koshiro Kiba later created a new part of the curriculum named the Kuji no ho for the rokushakubo.

Students do not generally teach what they have created to their teacher and have the teacher pass it along to others.

There is no record or mention of Koshira Kiba teaching Takamatsu sensei the kuji no ho. He seems to have done it after he had no more relation to Takamatsu sensei based on Takamatsu sensei's total absence of mention in his book.

There is no mention in any interview or document of Takamatsu sensei knowing or teaching the Kuji no ho.

There is no mention of Hatsumi sensei knowing, teaching or having an interest in the Kuji no ho.

No one in the Bujinkan has claimed to have seen, heard or been taught the Kuji no ho.

Steve originally learned from Tanemura sensei in the Bujinkan.

Tanemura sensei left the Bujinkan.

Tanemura sensei then went to train with Sato Kimbei who had a connection somehow leading back to Koshiro Kiba and taught the Kuji no ho.

Tanemura sensei has a video of the Kuji no ho.

Steve has a video on the Kuji no ho.

So, you can see that after Takamatsu sensei instructed Koshira Kiba, Koshira set up something different for the long staff. There is not much chance of Steve learning it in the Bujinkan. So, where did he learn it? The easiest answeris from a video by Tanemura sensei.

And the beautiful thing is that Garth himself originally mentioned that Hatsumi Soke should have no problem with Steve using the Kukishinden ryu name since he was teaching something that had nothing to do with Hatsumi sensei or the Bujinkan back in post #620.

 

Grimjack posted

Not according to what Mr Kohler wrote, and what is in the Bujinkan hanbo when it is compared with the Kiba Koshira book.

The argument is not whether there were changes in the Shobukyoku, but whether Mr Hayes could have learnt them from a Bujinkan teacher rather than Tanemura.

These two point only make sense if the Bujinkan do not know the Shobukyoku and it appears that they do. Actually the statement from Mr Lindsey states.

So Takamatsu knew the shobukyoku. Well at least according to John Linsey.
And if he taught Hatsumi everything then it follows that Hatsumi also knows it.

Theres no mention in any interview or document of Takamatsu sensei knowing or teaching a lot of things that Hatsumi is now teaching. Is there a document of Takamatsu mentioning Kuji Roppo Biken?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. which also goes for this point

and

http://www.kutaki.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=1983&forum=6&post_id=17331#forumpost17331

In fact there is documentation that Takamatsu started the Shobukyoku if one looks. In fact the back of the Kukishin Ryu Bujutsu book states

In fact if you have the book or Mr Tanemuras Rokushaku justu shoden kata Mokuroku list one finds that the Kuji no bo fits between the techniques of Kuridashi gata and the sabaki gata starting with Goho.

From Sean Askew

and

So where did the Kuji no bo come from?

So he has the Tenshin Hyoho scroll.
http://www.kutaki.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=1983&forum=6&post_id=17331#forumpost17331

So actually you might fiind that the Kuji No Bo is actually part of the Bujinkan bojutsu.

Richard Van Donk has.

OK that deals with the red ones. Now the black ones.

See above

Well that what hatumi said. So if Mr Tkamatsu knew the Shobukyoku and did not teach Hatsumi then Dr Hatsumi is mistaken in what Takamatsu taught him.

Take a look yourself.

No. never said this. I said he could have done. Actually he didn't it was a conclusion leapt at because some believed that only Mr Tanemura knew the Shobukyoku gata. However it seems now that it is not true. At least Mr Hatsumi knows this stuff.

Or was kicked out depending on your politics.

It does not say that it is on the DVDs, but from what i have seen it sure looks similar, although there are a lot of differences from the Tanemura material.

Did he? Do you have evidence for this. Or was it Iwami Nangaku that made the changes. But before we even go there.

Page 27 of Kiba Koshiras book states

Wait a minute are we saying the Kuji No bo was created shortly after 1336 and not by Kiba Koshira?

Takamatsu must have known this surely, and so must Hatsumi. After all did not Takamatsu teach all this back to the Kuki family.

Yes same line. Actually your wrong. The evidence above shows that the kuji no bo is well known in the Bujinkan. Why don't you go and ask Dr Hatsumi about it.

You see there you go again taking me out of context. What I said was

In other words the Bojutsu, unless I am mistaken does not come from the Kukishinden Happo Biken, but from the Shobukai as shown in the book by Kiba Koshira.

Yes. The Kuji No Bo may not be part of the Happo Biken, but it does not mean that Hatsumi does not know it.

Or maybe it is part of te Happo Biken. He just has not shown it yet.

Gary Arthur