The Washington times., 1925-04-11

"WeI. now, sonny" I says.
you're asking me to cover a lot OF
ground Do you mean who Is the
best today? Or which one was the
swiftest pitcher in his prime? Or
which one has been hardest for me
to bat against. just what do you
mean by-who's best? ?"
The little fellow seemed con-
fused as to what he really did
mean.
And that's what makes the ques-
tion hard to answer. It's a natural
question and I've heard it many
times. But most people try TO
cover too many angles in their
questions.
This much is certain-they are
two Of the greatest speed ball
pitchers the game has ever
known. And the question Is
dOubIy interesting because John
son was voted "the most valuable !.
player" In the American League
last season and Vance received
the same honor I'm the National.
Whenever one ball player COM
pares two other ball players he is
walking on thin ice, as they say.
I generally stay away from sucn
arguments, especially in newspaper
articles. And yet I've often seen
where some manager or player has
said Cobb or Hornsby was better
batter than me. Those things
never bother me. l might not
agree with them, but it's nothing
to be peeved about.
Besides, everybody's entitled to
his own opinion. And know
that's the way DazZy Vance viii
take this story. Facts are, he'll
probably get even by striking me
out three or four times the next
time we meet in game. Now, as
regards the speed Of these two fast
bah pitchers-I figure that National
League players who never batted
against johnson would be all for
Vance, anyway. I also know that
American Leaguers, who know
johnson and how it feels to be
famed by him, don't need much
argument on that point.
Honestly, I don't think there is
any comparison between the two.
johnson was so much better when
he was running on top form, that
TO compare him to any other speed
ball pitcher would be like compar-
ing Ty Cobb with rookie.
OF course, I'm talking about the
johnson Of a few years ago. Even
now he seems every bit as good as
Vance and in many ways much
better. But it wouldn't be fair to
the big boy to judge by his present
day form. His record is too great
for that.
Why, when Barney, as we call
johnson, had all his speed, his
fast one looked like a pea and
Travelled like a bullet. A batter
was lucky IL he saw the ball at
aIl. I've batted against him for
q good many years, thirteen in
al, and know what I'm talking
about. And I've batted against
Vance in a lot of games.
-
/ never even tried to change bat
ting positions on Barney. There
was only one way to bat against
him. That was to stand right up
close to the plate, get as good u
look at the ball as possible, and
swing. Hit or MISS that was the
only way to bat against the good
natured Swede.
His control was so good that you
almost always knew just where the
pill was going to cut the plate.
But that was all the good 1t did
you, 1t breezed right by you, and
when the catcher caught 1t, you
were wondering how it managed to
slip by you. I've hardly ever seen
johnson when he couldn't put the
ball just where he wanted it.
I've always thought. and still do,
that il Johnson had had change
of pace he never would have lost a
ball game RV that I mean that
without changing pace it got so
everybody knew pretty much what
to expect. They may have missed
most of them, but sometimes they
would connect. II Johnson had
been able to mix them up more he
would have stood the whole league
on it's ears.
What makes Vance fine