Re: ‘bat speed’ vs ‘bat quickness’
Posted by: Teacherman (
) on Sun Jan 1 15:35:24 2006
You're serious aren't you. I thought you just wanted discussion. But, apparently you don't believe it.
What is so hard to understand about it taking one guy longer to go from 0-80 (or whatever) that the next guy?
Followups:
Re: Re: ‘bat speed’ vs ‘bat quickness’
Jack Mankin
[ Sun Jan 1 18:39:10 2006 ]
Re: Re: Re: ‘bat speed’ vs ‘bat quickness’
Teacherman
[ Sun Jan 1 18:56:48 2006 ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: ‘bat speed’ vs ‘bat quickness’
Jack Mankin
[ Sun Jan 1 20:00:55 2006 ]
not fair
ray porco
[ Mon Jan 2 06:39:45 2006 ]
Re: not fair
Jack Mankin
[ Tue Jan 3 02:10:26 2006 ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ‘bat speed’ vs ‘bat quickness’
donny
[ Sun Jan 1 20:25:10 2006 ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ‘bat speed’ vs ‘bat quickness’
tom.guerry
[ Mon Jan 2 10:17:19 2006 ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ‘bat speed’ vs ‘bat quickness’
Shawn
[ Mon Jan 2 19:14:57 2006 ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ‘bat speed’ vs ‘bat quickness’
donny
[ Tue Jan 3 17:04:37 2006 ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ‘bat speed’ vs ‘bat quickness’
tom.guerry
[ Wed Jan 4 10:32:01 2006 ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ‘bat speed’ vs ‘bat quickness’
tom.guerry
[ Wed Jan 4 22:18:15 2006 ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ‘bat speed’ vs ‘bat quickness’
Jim
[ Sun Jan 8 14:00:02 2006 ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ‘bat speed’ vs ‘bat quickness’
tom.guerry
[ Wed Jan 4 22:12:14 2006 ]
Re: Barry Bonds - not normal
Banzai
[ Mon Jan 16 19:23:03 2006 ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ‘bat speed’ vs ‘bat quickness’
Jim
[ Wed Jan 4 20:55:45 2006 ]
Post a followup:
Name:
E-mail:
Subject:
Text:
> You're serious aren't you. I thought you just wanted discussion. But, apparently you don't believe it. > > What is so hard to understand about it taking one guy longer to go from 0-80 (or whatever) that the next guy?
Anti-Spambot Question:
How many innings in an MLB game?
4
3
9
2
[
SiteMap
]