Yes it is all there in the thread. It looks to me that you don't want to face the truth because of your particular set of beliefs:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/72052/message/1295365764/Trail+Arm
But nowhere have you stated a definition for lead arm above trail arm or dual rails. So I will provide one:
To me the camera should be at about elbow height (at impact) directly behind the elbows and perpendicular to the target line to determine whether the lead arm is above the trail arm. For instance:
![[linked image]](http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt117/slantdicular/53profrsetImp.jpg)
This camera angle is close to where I think it should be and shows that Hogan was clearly on two rails. Moe is not on two rails in Ham's picture which I think is close enough to impact to be valid and the camera is at close to the correct position. Unfortunately the camera in your picture is in the wrong place to make a judgment on the dual rails position as I pointed out earlier in the thread. So it seems to me that you tried to discredit the data that did not agree with you position while presenting faulty data that did agree with your position. If I am wrong about this I am listening.
As I understand it you believe that younger Moe had more bend in his trail elbow then older Moe and that he had the dual rails intact at impact?
Regards, Herbert
