Posted by: Black Hole Lexicographer (Knight1285@aol.com) on Tue Dec 28 19:56:37 1999

Dear Jack,
I can fully comprehend why Ted William's Science of Hitting was not given the respect that Ferroli's Hit Your Potential was. The reason involved others viewing Ted William's mechanical book as a keepsake ornament that is meant to be polished--but not opened--and left laying lifelessly upon the top of a five layer shelf, whereas Hit Your Potential gained instant interest. In writing, as in baseball, people are less intrigued by concepts--even interesting ones--allowed to levitate in the cosmos, as opposed to arguments that give a picturesque account of the mechanics involved to reach that concept. For this purpose, Ferroli's book was rendered more useful to Williams' because it illustrated specifics.

Now, following the logic of the argument I stated, would it not be wise to

a)Record on your site the information given me during your explanation of mechanics (i.e., back leg should rotate on ball of back foot, and back leg should turn in (or around).

b)Mention the "power L" (or, as you described, "classic L", in the mechanics section.

In my sincere belief, both belong in the mechanics section of your site, and I hope that is where you will put them (though I have no objection to them being mentioned elsewhere on your site.

Happy New Year
The Black Hole Lexicographer
Knight1285@aol.com