Hello John Spent last week modeling from the 2nd position... A great, uncomparable fun!!! ... As for that issue with the "client", you write: "The "client" that serves (no pun intended) as the test of your ability to reproduced the effects in the world elicited by your model through your own imitative behavior is the same opponents that your model plays against. That is, criterion is your ability to play against such opponents at the same level of quality as your original model." And now we consider a case of a mountain-climber... Will the mountain be the "client"? :-) You write: "Pity that the New Code is not popular in Russia - could that be a function of the quality and depth with which it is NOT being presented?" Sure - the situation must be changed. We'll see what can be done. By the way, where can one find the descriptions of New Code games other than the Alphabet? You mentioned the NASA game in the book and never described it (at least, I could not find :-). ... Now let me turn back to modeling. You've expressed your attitude towards Dilts' approach - got it. But there's another case of modeling Dilts was (and still seems to be) busy with - the modeling based upon books (the "textual" modeling???) How do you consider it? There should be something, as I can tell. 1. As far as I know, Richard Bandler modeled Fritz Perls mainly using the transcripts of the work of the latter. 2. You write in the book that before you visited Milton Erickson for the first time, you've spent some time reading his books, books about him and whatever and finally were able to use his own patterns "against" him while talking on the phone with him. 3. While in childhood, little boys and girls often act AS IF they were their favourite heroes from their favourite books. That's just one of the ways of learning and could be called "natural modeling". And from time to time the patterns used by adults match the patterns described in the books they read in childhood with great precision. I heard of such a case with American presidents but forgot who was modeling who specifically. 4. To my knowledge, Robert Dilts has undertaken several book-based modeling projects. I know of "The strategies of a genius". The sleight of mouth patterns can also be classified here. As for the latter, I have been practicing them for nearly a year and they seem to be a very useful set of verbal distinctions. This has to say that Dilts' method (though it is not clear how specifically has he modeled - whether he has followed his own process as described in "Modeling with NLP" or not) is able to produce something. Though your point about trying both ways and understanding the difference is reasonable. I'll try. :-) Oleg.