HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kenneth@ducvax.auburn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Gant's stolen base was stolen
Date: 16 Apr 92 06:26:46 GMT
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Apr15.114555.6168@ee.gatech.edu>, geoff@eecom.gatech.edu (Geoffrey Parker) writes:
> 
> -- 
>     __________________________________________________________________
>    /\                  Geoffrey Richard Parker			      |
>    \_|		   Georgia Institute of Technology		      |
>      | School of Electrical Engineering, Atlanta, GA  30332-0250-0250 |
>      |  	E-MAIL: geoff@rx7turbo.eecom.gatech.edu		      |
>      |			PHONE: (404) 973-2677			      |


Hmm...I take it he has no opinion on the subject? :)

Ken
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: epstein@sunc7.cs.uiuc.edu (Milt Epstein)
Subject: Re: Baseball - The 'ME' SPORT (was Re: Bobby Bonilla)
Reply-To: epstein@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 16:56:41 GMT

In <204958@unix.cis.pitt.edu> dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu (David M Tate) writes:

>In article <4200274@hpcc01.corp.hp.com> krattige@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Kim Krattiger) writes:
>>
>>I know that once it goes to pay-per-view, which I think is getting closer, 
>
>Then you aren't thinking very hard.  How much would anyone pay to see a game
>on TV, when they could see it in person for under $10?  Commercial baseball
>is *lucrative*; just not as lucrative as CBS thought it was going to be.

Gee, how lucrative can it be when they only show 1-2 dozen games a
year.  How is ESPN doing with their return on the baseball games?

-- 
Milt Epstein
Department of Computer Science
University of Illinois
epstein@cs.uiuc.edu
From: monty@SSD.CSD.HARRIS.COM (Monty Norwood)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Subjective trivia question
Date: 13 Apr 92 13:43:25 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Harris Computers Systems Division, Fort Lauderdale,FL

In article <204742@unix.cis.pitt.edu> dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu (David M Tate) writes:

Stuff deleted

>Oh, so close.  Cochrane led the league (AL) in OBP in 1933, at .459, beating
>the .449 posted by Jimmy Foxx for the same team (oof).  Max Bishop (.446),
>*also* with the A's, was third.  That's some kind of astonishing top of the
>order, especially with Foxx slugging .703.  The team was second in HR, first
>in SLG, second in OBP(!), and finished...third.  Essentially tied for last
>in team ERA.

Was this the era of the fabulous baker bowl? I remember reading a funny 
comment about the Philly outfielders having to wear gloves on the back of their
heads to protect themselves from balls bouncing off the outfield walls.

Anyway, the Baker Bowl was apparently quite a bandbox. Whether it was in use
for the above mentiened season, I don't know.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: ehickey@leland.Stanford.EDU (Eric Hickey)
Subject: Free Agent/Hall of Fame Questionnaire
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 06:56:52 GMT


Hello,

I am an undergrad in economics and sociology at Stanford.  Being
a big baseball fan, I'm doing a senior thesis concerning decision making 
and the economics of baseball.  I'm trying to see if certain phenomena that
occur in major league baseball can be predicted by standard economic models.

As part of my thesis I've constructed a 20-item questionnaire.  The first 
ten questions ask you to choose among different players as if you were
a GM and you can offer only one of the players a free agent contract.  The last
ten questions ask you to judge certain players chances of making the
Hall of Fame.

Part of my thesis involves an analysis of people's answers to these questions.
Because I don't have a research grant or anything like that with which to
pay people for their participation, I've had trouble finding enough
baseball-knowledgable people to fill out my questionnaire.  I would greatly
appreciate it if anybody out there could help me out by completing my
questionnaire.

The whole task should take only a few minutes.  And when you send your
answers back to me, I can then more fully explain the point of the
questionnaire and fill you in on the results.

If you are interested in participating let me know
at ehickey@leland.stanford.edu by Wednesday night, and I'll
send you a copy of the questionnaire.


Thanks a lot,

eric hickey (ehickey@leland.stanford.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: CAVGEOE@YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu
Subject: Re: Playoffs (was: Re: Expos)
Organization: Yale University
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 15:26:04 EDT

In article <1992Apr11.043014.27299@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca>
cs902159@ariel.yorku.ca (DAVID A LISOGURSKI) writes:
 
>
>In article <167C5D500.CAVGEOE@YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu> CAVGEOE@YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu writes:
>>In article <1992Apr10.035849.16471@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca>
>>cs902159@ariel.yorku.ca (DAVID A LISOGURSKI) writes:
>>
>>>I figure if they had the top 2 teams in each division play a best-of-5
>>>series, the owners would make more money, and the fans would have some
>>>exciting 'ball to watch late in the season.
>>
>>What makes baseball's playoff system so great is that only *champions*
>>of something (division, league) make the playoffs.  What if two teams
>>in a division are tied with two weeks to go, and everyone else is
>>eliminated -- then your format has *ruined* a potentially great pennant
>>race.  Oh, I forgot, they'll be playing for *home-field advantage*, the
>>biggest of the many artificialities in sports like football, basketball
>>and hockey.  "Exciting 'ball" to me is important games at the end of the
>>regular season, not a playoff where the teams' previous records are thrown
>>out the window.  I can't believe I'm deigning to respond to the money
>>argument, but:  if you want more money, why not lengthen the season to
>>200 games and have 24 teams make the playoffs -- the top 8 will get byes,
>>the other 16 will play the first round for spots in the octofinals, and
>>as teams get eliminated they report to spring training!  Money isn't
>>everything.
>>
>>Jeff Caveney
>>
>>>--Dave
>>>
>
>Talk about sarcasm!!!
>I said 'top 2 teams in each division play best-of-5' and you turn that
>into '24 teams make the playoffs'.  That's a bit of a stretch, I'd say...
>
     If you read what I wrote carefully, you'll see that the 24-team
playoff scenario was a reductio ad absurdum argument in response to
your suggestion that expanding the playoffs would be good because
of the extra money.  I didn't imply you advocated a 24-team playoff.
All of my other arguments (only champions should be in the playoffs;
top 2 teams going could ruin pennant races -- case in point, the Braves
and Dodgers last year; difficulty of overcoming one team's fast start
makes occasions when it does happen all the more historic and memorable;
teams that can't make a run from behind in the standings don't belong
in playoffs; etc.) applied to your specific proposal.
 
Jeff
From: niguma@ug.cs.dal.ca (Gordon Niguma)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: ALL-Troublemaker Team :)
Date: 13 Apr 92 23:21:15 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

In <1992Apr13.184236.26061@acsu.buffalo.edu> v393qp56@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Viktor Brenner) writes:

>In article <1992Apr13.083901.2325@ducvax.auburn.edu>, kenneth@ducvax.auburn.edu writes...
>> 
>>[ stuff deleted ]
>> 
>>> (This suggests a new thread. The All Trouble-Maker Team.)
>> 
>>Hey! Good idea! :)
>>Here goes!
>> 
>>POS Player Name                    Reason
>>--- ------------------------------ -------------------------------------------
>>OF  Kevin Mitchell                 Rape allegations, taking IF practice wearing
>>                                   a walkman 
>>OF  Darryl Strawberry              jerk
>>OF  jose Canseco                   leaving socks at Madonna's, speeding (55 mh
>>                                   OVER the limit)
>>OF  Otis Nixon                     Coke (no WONDER he runs so fast...he's
>>                                   WIRED!)
>>OF  Lenny Dykstra                  Drinking beer and wrecking car and season
>>1B  Franklin Stubbs                Charging mound with bat (I think it was him)
>>2B  Steve Sax                      mouth in general esp. while in LA
>> 
>>P   Roger Clemens                  Brawling w/o a license
>>P   David Cone                     Wanking
>>P   Oil Can Boyd                   Forcing the wife to imitate a punching bag
>>P   Pascual Perez                  Running away to NY after a bad start
>>P   Rob Dibble                     Throwing at a baserunner; jerk
>>P   Steve Howe                     Coke, coke, coke, coke, coke, and coke
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>3b  Gary Sheffield		WAAH!  How come he (Spiers) makes the club
>				in 2 years and it takes me 3?  I'm not 
>				gonna play!   I'm not gonna try!

>of  Ricky Henderson		I only make 3mil and i'm more important
>				to the game?  Who's this Ruth fella, get
>				his picture outta here, I'm the best that

How can we let Albert Belle go by? The guy doesn't hustle and gets sent to the
minors. He throws a ball at some fan in the stands. So here's some new adds to
the list:

OF   Albert Belle		So much of a prick I want to call him Joey ro
				piss him off. Oh wait he might throw a ball
				at me though.
OF   Junior Felix		Loud mouth
OF   George Bell		Really was a scapegoat in Toronto, this label
				isn't totally fair but was he ever an ass when
				he was asked to DH.
 P   Bryn Smith			Hung out with prostitutes.
 P   Jack Morris		Strikes me as an asshole, a know it all type

 1B  John Olerud 		Yah right!! The guy doesn't speak, how can
				he cause trouble?
M    Billy Martin		Too bad he's dead, otherwise he'd be getting
				in a fistfight with a player.
 M   Doug Radar			All the young players seem to hate him.

				
				Gord Niguma
				(fav player: John Olerud -The speechless wonder)
From: gajarsky@pilot.njin.net (Bob Gajarsky)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Contest - questions about it?
Date: 8 Apr 92 18:49:58 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Somewhere in Hoboken


there is this contest that has recently been in usa today, and
 other papers.  it features having to pick players from 18
 "rounds" (between 2, 3, 4, or 5 players, depending on the round)
 based on numbers of hits, homers, and rbi's.

a couple questions.  does it seem legit (if you've seen it)?  i
realise
 that there are going to be a lot of people (or some) out there who
 think that terry pendleton will do better in these 3 stats than
 matt williams, so there is a chance the people could make money, 
 but i'm just wondering about the whole thing.

by the way, it costs either 7.50 or 10$, depending on how many
 "reports" i want.  

- bob gaj
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: 91287041@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (gut feelings...)
Subject: Re: ALL-Troublemaker Team :)
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 03:03:46 GMT

In <1992Apr13.232115.24257@cs.dal.ca> niguma@ug.cs.dal.ca (Gordon Niguma) writes:
> P   Jack Morris		Strikes me as an asshole, a know it all type

HAHAAHA!!! if that's the case he should be sure to read it...every "know-it-all"
asshole in north america subscribes to this group....

>				
>				Gord Niguma
>				(fav player: John Olerud -The speechless wonder)

-- 
roger l. maynard                              
91287041@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca             
Sudbury Ont.                                
Canada                                     
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: mwdwhite@watnow.waterloo.edu (Martin White)
Subject: Re: Hey, I'm a NICE Jays fan!
Keywords:  Weenies
Organization: University of Waterloo
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 20:34:57 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.133132.9916@jts.com> geoff@jts.com (Geoff Vona) writes:
>Argh!  Gotta get this peeve offa my chest.....
>
>What happened to the nice Blue Jay fans of yesteryear?  I remember the
>early pennant drives of `84 and `85, and the predominant attitude amongst
>Jays fans was "gee, we really do have a good team! Maybe we're good enuf?"
>Now, the attitude seems to be "Our team kicks ass, yours sucks, don't talk
>to me just eat my dust!".
>
>When I was younger, I honestly thought that Toronto fans were different. Now
>I see that obnoxious fans are a result of a string of success.  I find
>myself wishing that the Jays were bad again so that I didn't have to listen
>to 1,000 bar conversations about the relative merits of Dave Winfield and
>Jack Morris.
>
>Jay fans seem to do more grandstanding on the net too.  How embarassing.

Please don't stereotype all Toronto fans because of the cocky (without
reason) idiots who constantly fill this net with Jays propaganda.  In
general, the fans are unassuming and too quiet at the Dome.  

martin
From: dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu (David M Tate)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Pitchers that batters hate to face (was Re: Henderson vs. Ryan)
Date: 16 Apr 92 15:26:14 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Apr15.235744.22816@panix.com> spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:
>
>But beingg a pitcher who scares hitters is
>not the same thing as being a succesful pitcher.  Hitters generally don't
>want to face pitchers who throw really hard (Bobby Witt, e.g.) or really
>weird (Sid Fernandez, e.g.).  But that's a measure of how uncomfortable
>the hitter is against the pitcher, not how good the pitcher is.

This is an interesting point.  For example, I've heard a number of hitters
who played in the '50s say that Ewell Blackwell was absolutely the last
pitcher on earth that they would ever want to bat against.  Now, Blackwell
was good, but not for very long, and not *that* good.  But he was sheer hell
on right(?)-handed batters, coming sidearm with serious heat that looked like
it was coming from the the third base bag right through your ear.

(I could have the handedness backwards, but the gist here is correct.)


-- 
          David M. Tate            |"The man who hath no music in himself
     dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu       | Nor is not moved by concord of sweet sound
  A poem should be dumb, / As old  | Is fit for treason, stratagems, and spoils
 medallions to the thumb.-MacLeish | 	Shakespeare, "Merchant of Venice", A.V
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: Eckersley NOT better than Fingers
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 92 21:42:06 GMT

In article <1992Apr12.183239.11547@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> glb50263@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Gary L. Blickhan) writes:
>Simply put, Eckersley is not better than Rollie Fingers.

Are you saying "better" in the sense of career value or peak value?  You
*might* have a case with career value, but definitely not with peak value.
>
>1)Fingers is already in the Hall of Fame.  A Sporting News poll of baseball
>writers concluded that Eckersley's chances are about "even money."

Only because he hasn't been a reliever for too long.  Or rather, only because
he has been pitching in Wrigley for quite a while.
>
>2)Fingers won the Cy Young award ***and*** the AL MVP in 1981, making him
>the first pitcher to win both in the same year.  (Willie Hernandez did it
>in 1984, but his name is not in this discussion.)  Eckersley has not won
>either award once.

As if those are really the best indications of how a pitcher is.  Remember how
Bob Welch won it over Roger Clemens?
>
>3)Fingers led the majors in saves three times (1977,1978,1981).  Eckersley
>has only done that once.

So, Jeff Reardon is the best active reliever?
>
>4)Fingers has the all-time record for saves. (341)   Eckersley had 188 at
>the end of 1991.
>
>5)In three World Series apiece, Eckersley did hardly anything.
>1988- 0 wins, 1 loss, 10.8 ERA.  He was the goat.
>1989- 1 save in 1 2/3 innings. 0 ERA.  Pretty good.
>1990- 0 wins, 1 loss, 6.75 ERA.  0 Saves.  Not good.
> 
> Fingers was great.  
> 1972- 1 win, 1 loss, 2 saves, 11 k's, 1.74 ERA.
> 1973- 0 wins, 1 loss, 2 saves, 8 k's, 0.66 ERA.
> 1974- 1 win, 0 losses, 2 saves, 6 k's, 1.93 ERA.

The A's needed the Eck to have any shot at the World Series in all three of
those years.  Take the Eck away, and you are seeing a different team.  It is
important to win World Series, but to do so, you must get there first.

> 6) Fingers has a 2.90 ERA compared to the 3.47 ERA of Eckersley.

Because Eckersley had been a starter for most of his career, and has pitched
mostly in Wrigley.
>
> 7) Eckersley is no longer effective.  I believe he was tagged for 11 or so
> long balls.  Donnie Hill of the Angels got his only homer of the season
> of the Eck.  

His opponent OBP is *so* low, though, that it compensates, really, for the
long balls.

===============================================================================
GO CALIFORNIA ANGELS!
Charter Member of the Acker-o-phobics Anonymous
===============================================================================
Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: jlundy@bilbo.encore.com (Joe Lundy)
Subject: Re: Eckersley NOT better than Fingers
Organization: Encore Computer Corp.
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 16:53:05 GMT

In article <1992Apr14.205226.17091@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, mab50312@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Mark Blickhan "schpiel") writes:
|> zuhars@madrone.eecs.ucdavis.edu (Gary Hairless Primate Huckabay) writes:

|> >Bob Welch won the CY in 1990.  Bell and Dawson won MVP in 1987.  Cecil
|> >Fielder finished second in AL MVP voting last year.  LaMarr Hoyt.
|> >Pete Vuckovich.  Baseball writers have proven, beyond a shadow of a 
|> >doubt, that they don't know squat.
|> 
|> Anyway, this is just obvious argument ad hominem. They put people into
|> the HOF whether they know anything (by your standards, which are....???).

Sounds like an ad hominem selection process on the part of the baseball
writers.  Gary, I think you left Jeff Burroughs out...

Whether or not Eckersley makes it into the hall of fame or not is irrelevant.
Given his 3-4 prime relief years with the A's, I would have taken them in a 
heartbeat over any 3-4 years of Fingers career, even 1981.  Fingers does deserve
to be in the Hall, IMHO.  Yes, the Eck is borderline.

|> Ok, you think saves are meaningless (I do not agree). Then what is meaning-
|> ful? You mention **era adjusted**. HOW?? Basing an adjustment of era on
|> (I don't know, moustache length??) anything is ridiculous!  ERA IS an
|> adjustment!!! It adjusts for inherited runners, errors, etc. There is 
|> no consensus about ballpark adjustments (runners scored in Wrigley are only
|> worth 89.472563467938646% of runners that score in the Astrodome?).

Not to nitpick, but how does E.R.A. adjust for inherited runners (fairly)
I.e., a pitcher yields to Tom House with the bases loaded will have more of a 
chance of racking up a few points on the old E.R.A., than if he yields to say
Dennis Eckersley.

|> If the Eck HAD to pitch for the Cubs, he is totally responsible for 
|> signing the contract. (On the other hand, are Ryno's homers worth any less?)

This is a ridiculous argument.  Eck had little say in being TRADED to the Cubs
(for Billy Bucks - which at the time WAS a good trade, I will still contend)
and as Jonathan King points out still managed to have impressive numbers in then
what were two of the best hitters parks in the majors.

That strikeout to walk ratio is unbelievable.  What control, finesse, and power.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Joe Lundy           Encore Computer Corporation, 6901 W. Sunrise Blvd.    |
| jlundy@encore.com   Mail Stop 811, Ft. Lauderdale, FL  33313-4499         |
| "You've got a new imagining coming, In Your Face." - Lei Wang		    |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Winfield vs Clark
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1992 16:07:13 GMT

In article <1992Apr5.152017.25372@tc.cornell.edu> jfe@alchemy.tn.cornell.edu (Brian Chung) writes:
>In article <1992Apr4.005436.14902@berlioz.nsc.com> roger@thoreau.nsc.com ( Roger Wakefield) writes:
>>rf:     Plantier    Bell           (edge Plantier, although I haven't
>>seen Bell much)
>
>	Disagree.  This is the same situation as the shortstop.  I would give
>edge to anyone until the season ends.

It's hard to see how Bell's better than Plantier.  Bell's faster, but that's
it.  In the International League, Plantier has outhit Bell both in 1990 and
in 1991; plus Plantier has done far far better in his 67 major league games
than Bell has in his 18.  And Plantier did better defensively in the majors
last year than Bell did.  Plantier hit twice as many home runs last year
as Bell did, even with fewer ABs, and spending almost half his season
facing major league pitching.  No comparison.

>>cf:     Burks       White          (edge Burks)
>
>	Edge White.  I like White's speed and hitting. 

In 1991, yes.  Burks's 1988-1990 were each better than White's best season
(last year), and he's two years younger.  Unless you see a reason why
Burks won't go up and White won't go back down, I'd have to give the
edge to Burks.  White is better defensively.

>>lf:     Greenwell   Carter         (edge Carter)
>
>	Carter for MVP this year.

Why this year?  The man's in his thirties.  Greenwell had a better season
than Carter in 1987, in 1988, in 1989, and in 1990.  He's three years
younger than Carter.   Heck, I'll go farther and say that Greenwell will
have a better season than Carter this year.  Edge Greenwell.

>>dh:     Clark       Winfield       (strong edge Clark, why doesn't
>>Gammons agree?)
>	Because Winfield IS better?  Clark just has not been producing.
>Winfield produces a lot more than Clark.

Clark, who is four years younger, had a better season than Winfield
last year; about the same slugging percentage, home runs, and RBI's,
but Clark walked *forty* more times than Winfield, and Winfield ate up 
an additional 75 or so outs.  Unless the new park helps Winfield more than
turning 41 hurts him, Clark should have a substantially better season.

The Blue Jays got career seasons from White and Carter.  They'll be
helped by the addition of Winfield, but White and Carter returning to
their normal stats will neutralize that, though Olerud should improve.

The Red Sox had a bunch of off-years from their players last year, plus
they played Brunansky far too much.  Greenwell and Burks improving
slightly, plus replacing Bruno with Plantier will give them potentially
the best outfield in the AL.
-- 
Ted Frank          + "A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged, it
1307 E 60 St, #109 +  is the skin of a living thought and may vary greatly in
U o' C Law Skool   +  color and content according to the circumstances and
Chi, IL 60637      +  the time in which it is used."  --  Holmes
From: macole@wam.umd.edu (Mario A. Cole)
Subject: Re: Camden Yards
Organization: University of Maryland at College Park
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 00:10:18 GMT

In article <1992Apr14.021422.235@zia.aoc.nrao.edu> dadler@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (David Adler) writes:
>In article <1992Apr13.215833.16128@wam.umd.edu> macole@next11csc.wam.umd.edu (Mario A. Cole) writes:
>>In article <1992Apr13.092926.731@dvorak.amd.com> twhite@mozart.amd.com  
>>(Tom White) writes:
>>>    So who hit the first homer in the Orioles' new park?
>>
>>Mike Devereaux...nice shot too..
>>
>
>No. Deveraux hit the first Oriole homer on Thursday night. Paul Sorrento
>of the Indians hit the first homer in Oriole Park in Camden Yards on
>Wednesday night.

hehe...see what happens when you watch hometown television....they showed
Devereaux's shot over and over again...never saw Sorrento's shot.  Well,
sorry for the misinfo...let me go crawl under that rock of mine again.

gee...to think...I dowsed myself with gasoline and no one flamed me...
thanks for the corrections (the nice corrections) :-)

Mario

-- 
Mario A. Cole      | HJ Ford Associates |"A faithful friend is the  
Univ. of Maryland  | Crystal City       | medicine of life."                 
macole@wam.umd.edu | Arlington, VA      |
H: (301) 868-9249  | W: (703) 553-5580  | ECCLESIASTICUS 6:16