jo
|o
[tv
IK

May 11, 1939

Mr. R, E. Weinzettel |
Fred Medart Manufacturing Co.
St. Louis, Mo.

Dear Mr. Weinzettel;

I have your letter of May 9 and am endlosing copy of that section of the min-—
utes of the National Basketball Committee meeting which deals with the modified
backboards.

You will note from the enclosed sheet that I am attempting to get definite agree-
ment on the part of members of the committee relative to the board size and shape
toward which we should work. It is my belief that one approximating the pro-

posed diagram will be sanctioned. Note that the cut out space below is contin-
gent on developing a basket which will clamp to the bottom of the board with only
metal braces extending below. Of course, if such a basket cannot be satisfactor-
ily developed, it will be necessary to leave at least three inches below the

level of the basket. However, the board space below the ring is entirely waste

and if it can be eliminated, it will allow much better vision from behind the back-
board.

In my opinion, boards of several years in the future will be of this type although
no one could guarantee that this prophecy is an accurate one. Probably the best
way to secure the transition is to encourage those who are erecting new equipment
to arrange the braces in such a way that they will be not more than 54 inches from
left to right and not more than 30 inches vertically. I helieve this is a wide
enough spread to support the smaller board since its weight will be considerably
less than the present one.

As far as the convex surface is concerned, I believe this has just as much merit
aS the smaller size. However, it is my belief that it will be more diffiault to
make a transition from the flat surface to the convex surface. If it is purely a
matter of size a team could very well practice on the large board and not be
handicapped when playing on a floor which might have the small board. This is
not the case if the surface is changed. It would probably take a team some time
to get adjusted to a convex surface after having practiced on a flat surface. For
this reason it might be necessary to proceed on the assumption that the first
change which might be made is the change in size and shape. If desirable, the
convex board could then be substituted at a later date for the other..

You will understand that I am attempting to look at this from the standpoint of
practice in making the trangition as well as in connection with the theory under-
lying the desirable features of both the changed size and contour.

As far as curvature is concerned, I believe that a curvature such that the middle
part of the board will be from four to six inches thicker than the edge (measured
on the board which is 6 feet wide) is about right. It may be that the six inch
curve would be more desirable than the four in case the carrower board is used.