“3. Add resource from third perspective ie the scope outside the context involved. This can be Ok, Thomas, You wrote, "the game propsed in whispering or any high quality state from any other area that outside the context of the the 2 circles." The third position or a strong out of the contexts 3 position applied to the 2 and then to the first after 2. Which means that the scope outside of the contentfree state Grinder/Carmen suggests isnt needed to be able to reach the same or better results. You wrote, "4. Add the third scope to the decision circle." The third position or strong state outside of the context of the current issue at 1 and 2 position. (1 are the problem 2 is the decisions u made trying to solve the problem) You wrote,"5. Add the change to the decision circle to the problem circle and presto solved.”" If you have a 3 position which are a strong gamestate or any other context not related to the issue at hand and you add that to the 2 position updating the desicionstate. Then you add that 3+=2 to the problem position "1". Get that? This is where Grinder and carmen might suggest that the add on third outside of context isnt a clean state proposed in the games startegy. They however state in the book that the third state applied with strong kino will be sufficient. My work, with this destinction has been busy the last few months. I have a pattern down which soon will be sent to Grinder and carmen. Basically this exersize is one part of things i have done. But no offending was done. I only which to add the destinction that to DO then to talk about are more useful than the other way around. The reference experience are to important to not having as a variable into any pattern disscusion. I think thats where M Hall and Grinder/Carmen differ, They have different criteria to verify and test what works and are useful. M Halls work has been tested in ways where people who been into NLP testify that it added to there knowledge of NLP. That in some ways can be said by Grinder and Bandlers work also. I think whats been lacking and still is are the form-content and structure destinction. For years I been told that and as in the book whispering they added that to make that explicit. M Halls model does that better than earlier explantions and models proposed by Bandler and Grinder and others like R. Dilts etc.. Its not enough to know what works and are useful. You also need models to teach that. Excplicitly. So far nor Grinder nor Bandler has made that. I think that speaks a lot of whats been the issue by M Halls work. Still I might be worng u know ;) /Robert