tatw is not exactly like atw-co nt. unless nt means not touch between the tricks and no touch of the ground and in 1 fluuent motion all in one then i agree. but if its not, :cheers: ur wrong.
nt can mean both things depending on wich side you look at it... If u read my last comment I talked about tatw amatw nt
in that trick everybody does the both trick intersection with only one foot on the floor.... but what happens now if I do it with both feet on floor??will it still be tatw-amatw nt??.. well, I think the answear is yes, its just the same shit as the difference between tatw and michryc weird thingy... both are the same "combo"(atw-co nt), just that they are performed differently....
I think I've got at least a good point, I hope u understand my statement, and if not, well, I really dont give a fuck, everybody has their own opinion's... what I've said is my opinion...what you said was your opinion....
:cheers:
i think u have a misconception about wat is 'ur opinion'
1+1=23452, that is my opinion. its wrong no matter wat, its not an opinion really coz, i dunno how 2 explain, but i think u get wat im trying 2 say.
let me break it down 4 u, does michryc's atw-co nt look like tatw? no, so how can u say that atw-co nt IS tatw?
again... I wrote a long post for nothing...
read what I've said... I said atw-co nt can be performed in 2 ways... one is michryc thingy and the other is tatw.. and I even gave a long example about how can tatw-amatw nt be performed... you can have both feet on the floor in the intersection of both tricks or you can have only one leg on the floor when the intersection of both tricks happend(that ways everybody does it)... but 1 way or another it still is tatw-amatw nt...no matter how different/equal they look....
so the only fucking difference is that michryc thingy has feet on floor and tatw not...like the example I just explained
in some way I agree with you....yes they look different, are performed differently... but they still are atw-co nt both
You haven´t read my post at all... isn´t it?? and btw you are very arrogant saying that I cant have my opinion because things are like you say...
so next time you want to reply to my post please take the time to at least read the whole post... not just a fragment like u did this time
:cursing:
i read the whole thing, i just didnt comment on it. atw-co nt doesnt look like tatw so thats it, its not the same. doesnt matter how u do tatw, its not going 2 look like tatw unless u dont touch the floor, is in 1 fluent motion. not the case wen it comes 2 atw-co nt? u know y? bcoz they r 2 tricks! not 1 trick.
OK! im still sticked to my opinion, but I dont care anymore.... I respect your opinion,
like I said, in some way u are right...but im not convinced 100%...
I think I won't make change your mind, and u won't change my mind, so I dont think its worth following this discussion...
:cheers:
