Hi Raf,
I must admit that we might have a communication problem. Obviously I did not quite get the essence of your argumentation, especially as it was without any illustrations, in which case I am completely 'Lost in Translation', and you put 'two weak' and 'two strong' where I had expected to read 'too'. I'm also not sure what you meant by 'secondary sear prop.'
Please forgive a bloody German who has just been trying to improve his English ...

. I am sure that you can explain your point so that I can grasp it.
Best,
Michael