Evening star., 1918-01-20
SAYS FANS WOULD LIKE TO SEE
! PITCHERS MASTERY CURTAILED
Billy Evans Believes Lovers of Base Ball
Would Welcome Innovation to
Increase Hitting Slightly.
BY BILLY EVANS.

x1lCE case / Ill
T BY BILLY EVANS.
Would lovers of base ball welcome
come innovation that would tend to in
crease slightly the hitting department
of the game?
While base ball is a we'll balanced
sport, I think that if the mastery oi
the pitcher were somewhat curtailed it
would meet with the approval of fan
dom.
do not believe any radical change is
necessary to bring about the desired
result. Some years ago. when it was
desired to aid the effectiveness of the
pitcher, the foul strike rule. radical
departure, was inaugurated- 1t might
have been more of ffty-fifty PROPOSE
lion II only the first foul had been re-
garded as strike instead of the first
two, but any change now as to the foul
strike feature is hardly possible. But
there is no doubt some way to cut
down the edge of the pitcher and add
a few more thrills to the pastime.
The world series demonstrated to me
that fandom reveled in a batting rally.
Don't get the idea / believe old-time
slugging is desired but | do beiieVe
fans get more pleasure out of a-to-5
or 5-to-4 game than they do out of a
1-to-0 or 2-to-1 contest. In the i-to-5
or 5-to-4 game there is just enough
hitting on each side so each team al
ways has men on the bases. where a
base hit can do considerable damage.
1t Is such situations that make base
ball the sport it is. In l-to-O games or
2-to-I affairs the fan sits back and
watches the batters with regular mo-
notony march to the plate and then
back to the bench, victims of the mas
terry of the pitcher.
Those who attended the first game of
the 1917 series between the Giants and
the Sox will recall that contest as a
pitchers battle pure and simple. Cicotte
and Sallee both were in fine form. 1t
was a well pitched. well played game,
Chicago winning. to l. y home-run
drive by Felsch into the left-field
bleachers decided the game, but even
that mighty wallop didn't cause any
wild demonstration.
Wild Contest Approved.
The fifth game was one of the wild
est affairs l have ever seen in the an
nual classic. Fans who saw that game
tell me they never had so many thrills,
never got such a run for their money.
] do know that l have never seen a
world series crowd go as wild as did
the Chicago fans that afternoon as the
Sox came from behind. tied up the
game and then breezed home an easy
winner. At one stage the score was 5
to against the Sox. Three runs in the
seventh tied it up. three more in the
eighth made possible an s-to-5 victory.
! umpired at third base and during the
last two innings the best thing I did
was restore hats to owners in the field
boxes who cared not where they threw
them.
articles considered the intentional
pass by a pitcher to get out of the
way q feared batsman. 1t has been
practice that has always been dis
pleasing to me. SO I took the so-called
strategy to task. In the same article
! advanced q suggestion made to me by
p Louisville fan. who favored the aboli-
tion Of q base on balls as a means of
reaching first base. That suggestion
seemed rather radical to me, but it was
Interesting.
Fans Don't Like It.
That the Intentional pass is disliked
by practically every fan has been
proven to me in the last few weeks
From coast to coast fans in the thirty
i've cities have written me app1auding
the article dealing with the Intentional
pass. have received scores of letters
Offering suggestions, some of which are
rather out of the ordinary. For that
reason have picked out a few of these
letters and intend letting the en-
thusiasts know just how the real fan
views some Of the technical points of
the game.
I will open with a letter from a
tnerce. From the tone Of his letter it
would seem base ball lost a valuable
supporter.
The intentional pass cured me of
baseba1litis," he starts out. From q
fan who attended at least two games
series games in 1917 and two regular
games. four games in 1916, three>games
in 1915 and one in 1914. 1 got dis
gusted in going to games and seeing
pitchers take the real thrill out Of the
contest by refusing to take a chance
with some crack batter who is paid
a fancy salary to hit the ball to meet
just such situations. I believe giving
all runners a right to advance a base
when the pitcher Intentionally passes
forced to advance or not, to make
room for the batsman. / trust the
Intentional pass will be done away
with In tho near future. The moment
st Is eliminated base ball will have
won back an ardent supporter"
Detroiter Has Plan.
From Detroit comes the following:
II have read your article on the in
territorial passing of star batters. Be-
ing an old base ball player and fan,
am offering a suggestion on that point
which I believe would effectively stop
the practice. / would suggest that it
be left optional with the manager of
the team at bat. when a batter draws
four balls. whether the batter go to
first or the base runner be allowed to
advance one base and the batter hit
over again.
las an illustration: Bush is on sec
ond base and Cobb is at the bat. Cobb
draws four balls. Instead of Cobb go
ing to first. Jennings would exercise
send Bush to third. If Cobb managed
TO work another pass out of the pitcher
Jennings would have the right to score
Bush or send Cobb to first. Such a
rule. I feel sure. would make the
pitcher more careful. hence would tend
to greatly help batting.
'lf at the time there were more than
one runner on the bases. only one of
the runners would be permitted to ad-
vance a base. and 1t would always be
the runner nearest the home plate.
That is. If there were men on first and
second and the batsman was passed.
and the manager decided to let the
batter hit over. the runner on second
would advance to third, but the runner
on first would remain there. This means
the team at bat can gain one additional
base on each pass If it decides to ex-
ercise its option in that direction.
"Under such conditions the oppos-
4ng pitcher would be forced to let the
I,tt ..,ith oil