Benjamin

Very interesting, It's the right balance between keeping enough basic knowledge, not to let the neophyte behind, and enough details to tell an unheard story even for big readers. I also look forward for more.

Thank you very much HB. I took my tickets, and can't stand waiting to be there

Thank you HB, I'm interested too. I think I'll try to come.

Hum.. France lost the war thanks to stubborn high-grade military who denied some realities... By the way, I have a theory which say that when americans make fun of french, they are not confident with their actual situation (please, take it as a friendly funny reprisals, not a pretext to talk politics).

Having participated to this thread, I want to greatly thanks Michaël, Thomas and Uwe for their posts with nuances and corrections. Please, don't stop precising things that you think they have to be precised. I'm agree with you, Uwe, with the fact that us, newbies, always need the counterpart to forge a opinion. Paradox is that Jacques is frequently sustained by experimented folks here, saying he is frequently right... but being constantly countered... making the whole thing not always understandable for us, common people. Moreover his attitude don't simplify that. Jacques, you are challenged with strong arguments, you have to answer more constructively. As I said to you, I tried to past through your attitude to see what you really have to say, I played the game. Here I'm struck to see how your knowledge is constructed with strong bias. Isn't there a bit of cognitive dissonance you tend to resolve by misinterpreting reality rather than nuance or change your opinion? That's sad because you obviously have worked a lot. You would gain taking a step back and think about it. Best regards to all

There is (and there will be) countless post on Jacques's behaviour. Shouldn't we, this time, focus on the thread that is really interesting? Of course, it's up to us, newbies, to read with critical sense, through the participation of all.

In my understanding of the discussion: - books (Nagayama and Nakahara at least) are stating that all non-suguha hamon are Midareba. - Jacques is stating that NOT all non-suguha hamon are midareba, some non-suguha hamon are midare (irregular) or have midare elements, some are not, they are regular (and I think he is not wanting to say that japaneses never use the term midare in their description of hamon). - Nakahara clearly state "the category of midare can be further broken down..." - Jacques is saying "midare is not a type of hamon, just a characteristic of the hamon" For me the 2 statements are not compatible (and I'm not the one to settle the discussion). That's what fascinate me with Nihonto, it resist to be resumed in a category (art object, weapon, collectible, martial art, antiquity...)

Very wild guess again for me :

Hadn't time to answer last one due to work, etc.. But the show must go on!!! here is my next wrong answer : I have a little question : what you call the "basis" can it be called the Habuchi ? (or is the habuchi the same thing as the nioiguchi?)

Good news! So there is hope!!!

If You allow a comment, the format is not perfect for large participation : the one who have obvious answers will not answer (legitimately thinking they are out of league for that game) and the one who haven't answer will not answer (not to spam the topic with a "I don't know" or random answer). Even more without book or internet, the one with a doubt will hesitate to answer until you go on. I suggest you let people who have doubt to check books and precise it, that allow to discuss references. The aim is to fix term in our mind, not to be in failure. And this thread have already a few hundred view, don't forget that there is people that play the game in their head without responding, and waiting for the initial promise for explanations. I suggest also to greet each question with a detailed and interesting revealing of answers to sustain the interest of participants. And sometime to trigger debate Just my thinking, not an asking. for my response (without book) :

Anyway, thank you for the try Jacques, that helped clarifying some things for me.

It refers to the pattern of the hamon / nioiguchi : valley (tani), slope (koshi) and top (yakigashira) of each wave.

Sorry but I'm even more confused Why does the hamon wouldn't be part of the whole blade? I understand the hamon as a separating line between the Ha and the Ji (even if it is sometimes referred as the whole whitish pattern among the ha). So I would say answer 1 and 2 are true