FRED MEDART 5 MANUFACTURING Co. POTOMAC AND DE KALB STREETS SAINT Loulis, Mo. R. E. WEINZETTEL March 23, 1940 SALES PROMOTION MANAGER Dr. Forrest C. Allen University of Kansas Lawrence, Kansas Dear Phogs Confirming our telephone conversation of yesterday afternoon, I am arranging to ship two of the convex basketball backboards to me C/o Continental Hotel. These boards will leave here Monday and we have Tuesday delivery promised so we should have them on hand in time for us. to get busy the following day, Wednesday, and have them erected. Incidentally, I have written our Kansas City sales representative to get his erection crew handy beginning Wednesday noon and even though it was not definite that you could be with me Wednesday noon, I was forced to do this because sometimes a crew is away on a job in some other town and the problem becomes a little difficult. I am hopeful you can arrange to come into Kansas City Wednesday and do what is necessary to get Walker lined up, and thus help us to get the boards installed without a hitch. Incidentally, I am sending two boards because I want to install one of them in the gym, and the other board I thought I would have de- livered to the parlor reserved for the basketball committee so the various members can look it over at close range rather than when suspended from an overhead brace of some kind. in any event, I will call Kansas University, Station 83, about 8:30 or a little after, Wednesday morning, to learn whether you are al- ready on your way or will come in. I was certainly surprised to learn from you that some Pittsburgh out- fit has a sample board. I am wondering just what this is as we have no previous knowledge of a board being made or developed by a Pitts- burgh concern, Kindest regards. It will be good to see you again next week. Cordially yours, REW/AC STEEL LOCKERS___ STEEL WARDROBES____STEEL SHELVING___.GYMNASIUM APPARATUS____GYM SEATS____BASKETBALL BACKSTOPS____PLAYGROUND APPARATUS me \y \ FRED MEDART MANUFACTURING Co. POTOMAC AND DE KALB STREETS SAINT Louis. Mo. E. J. MEDART March 27, 1940 PRESIDENT Dr, F, ¢, Allen University of Kansas Lawrence, Kansas Dear Dr. Allen: During the past 17 months it has been our privilege to assist in the work undertaken by your Committee to determine the advisability of a change in the size and shape of the present basketball backboard. Much time has elapsed since we first entered this picture. Because of that fact, which may obscure an appreciation of our position in this cooperative effort, I am anxious that each member of the National Bas- ketball Rules Committee know that during the past 17 months our effort has been strictly non-commercial, inspired only by a desire to contri- bute something of value, if possible, to the data you obtained else- where. It has been suggested that we submit the attached summary of results from our effort to each member of your group. In presenting it to you, we are hopeful that this contribution may be of some value. When invited to participate in this work, it was obvious that our manu- facturing facilities permitted us to attack this mutual problem from a different angle, in that we were in a position to design, fabricate and install actual full-size samples in many parts of the country for the use of local coaches and for the enlightenment of your Committee from this actual-use experience. During this period of experimentation we have had a number of requests for quotations on this new type of basketball backboard, and notwith- standing the assurance of your Secretary that the sale of convex back- boads for cross court use would be permissible for experimental pur- poses, we have invariably discouraged the purchase of this new type of backboard until your Committee ecm pass upon its practicability viewed from the various angles that you will have to take into consideration. Permit me to express my appreciation for the opportunity that has been afforded us to cooperate in this experiment with the National Basket- ball Rules Committee. Cordi yours, (Ale fleet President RJM/AC STEEL LOCKERS___ STEEL WARDROBES____ STEEL SHELVING____GYMNASIUM APPARATUS____GYM SEATS____BASKETBALL BACKSTOPS____PLAYGROUND APPARATUS REPORT BY FRED MEDART MANUFACTURING CO. ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI % % FOREWORD * * In October, 1938, we were approached by a local basketball enthusiast with the suggestion that a convex surface applied to the conventional 4' x 6' backboard would do much to eliminate waste areas, allow maximum shooting angles from the corners, permit maximum visibility for specta- tors, eliminate the mental hazard when attempting a short from the side line directly opposite the edge of the flat backboard, and to open up the game by reducing the congestion in the immediate vicinity of the backboard. A brief but interested investigation of the above claims indicated merit in the suggestion and two sample backboards were constructed for test purposes. Arrangements were made to install and demonstrate these two 4'x 6' square backboards with the convex surface, in the gymnasium of the High School in University City, Missouri, a suburb of St. Louis. Inasmuch as we had no previous acquaintance with any member of the Basket- ball Rules Committee, we selected from the Backetball Rules Book two mem- bers of the Committee, i.e., Mr. H. V. Porter, Secretary, and Dr. F. C. Allen, Chairman of the Research Committee, and to these two gentlemen we extended invitations to visit the demonstration on March 29, 1939, of the sample boards at the University City High School before approximately 50 coaches from St. Louis and surrounding suburbs. Unfortunately, Mr. Porter advised that he was unable to make the trip but that Dr. Allen, who was in Chicago at that time, would return to Lawrence via St. Louis and join in the test. Upon making the acquaintance of Dr. Allen we learned for the first time that your organization had devoted considerable thought and effort in an attempt to modernize the backboard and that our efforts in the same direc- tion were opportune and welcome. An invitation to exhibit the convex surface backboard before your annual meeting in New York City followed. Arrangements were made with the downtown gymnasium of New York University to exhibit three boards as follows: 1. Standard 4' x 6! square board with convex surface. 2. Same as above but with the four corners rounded. 3. Small, fan shaped board with convex surface. This board was similar in general appearance to the backboard illus- trated in the Summer edition of your Rules Book and as is now exhibited for your inspection at Continental Hotel a ee Following the above exhibit in New York, which will be remembered by a majority of your present membership, we were encouraged to make further tests, using the dimensions of the board illustrated on page 47 of the Summer edition of the 1939-1940 Rules Book. We followed the suggestion and fabricated fifteen special backboards, using the 32" dimension rather than the 27" smaller board as illustrated below. Before reporting results of the demonstrations in various Basketball Coaching Schools and other institutions during 1939, we submit for your consideration a comparison between the objectives of the Rules Committee xX as set forth on page 47 of the Summer edition of the 1939-1940 Rules Book and the claims of the exponents of the convex surface backboard. The Modified Backboard Question The following data is reproduced from Page 47 of the Official 1939-1940 Basketball Rules Book by permission of the copyright owners. It is offered in conjunction with the demonstration backboard on exhibit, to acquaint all basketball coaches with - what is being attempted by the Research Committee of the National Basketball Committee of the United States and Canada to modernize present backboards which are considered inadequate for today’s game. — oa ee Boe zi i a MODIFIED BACKBOARDS (Reproduction of Page 47 of the 1939-1940 Basketball Rules Book) “If backboards were to be designed to fit the present day type of game and, if there were no problems connected with the transi- tion, the boards would be quite different from the traditional 4 by 6 rectangle. At the last meeting of the National Basketball Committee it was unanimously agreed that there is considerable waste space in the present type of board and that this has become a detriment. They authorized a section in the guide to be devoted to the outlining and discussion of the most suitable type of back- board to fit present day conditions. The sentiment, based on extensive experimentation, indicates that a board resembling one of the two types shown on the diagram above is desirable. It is probable that the board of future years will be of this type and further experimentation has been authorized. Such a board would: 1. Permit freer use of the four-foot end space, permit offensive play from nearly all sides of the basket and thus relieve congestion in the lane. 2. Greatly increase the visibility of the basket from corners and ends of the gymnasium. 3. Increase the space under the basket from which a goal may be made and permit a rebounder to escape from congested area. 4. Simplify the bridgework for hanging the backboard since the weight would be reduced by nearly one- half and the span would not be so great as to cause warping or twisting. 5. Have a more pleasing streamlined appearance and be a better target, thus promoting greater accuracy. Failure to streamline the backboards is due to the initial expense in making a change and to difficulties due to lack of uniformity during a transition period. However, the same problems con- front every industry when changing conditions make equipment obsolete. No group can afford to forever limit itself to use of models designed for conditions of several decades ago. If such a change were to come, it would probably have to come as an optional measure during a transition period of several years. In the meantime, those who are installing new equipment may choose to anticipate improvements and use a supporting struc- ture which will not exceed the limits outlined above. The present type backboard could then be trimmed down or easily replaced by a smaller one. A pair of modified boards might be installed immediately on one of the cross courts. An exchange could easily be made between regular court and cross-court if it should be desirable in the future. Interested groups should make observations on the space actually used on present boards and encourage experimental use of the proposed type. Several manufacturers have shown a willingness to produce boards of this type for experiment. One of these is the Fred Medart Manufacturing Company, St. Louis, Missouri. They have built boards of the proposed size and shape and also with an added feature, a convex rather than a plane surface.” a Re: Convex Surface Backboard... With reference to the five enumerated advantages of the modified backboard, listed above, the following extract from the 1939- 1940 Rules Book, Page 46, Paragraph 1, under the heading “EXPERIMENTATION” — “‘THERE IS ALSO MERIT IN BOARDS WITH A CONVEX SURFACE WHICH WILL PERMIT ADDI- 1. ‘‘Freer use of the four-foot end space, etc.”’ TIONAL FREEDOM IN THE FOUR-FOOT END SPACE AND WHICH WILL TEND TO SCATTER THE REBOUNDS AND THUS RELIEVE CONGESTION IN THE AREA IMMEDIATELY IN FRONT OF THE BASKET.” — is supported by the following claims which are presented for your consideration. A comparison of the drawings below reveals the added opportunity of offensive play on convex surface backboard. END COURT LINE END COURT LINE END COURT LINE = — MODIFIED 54” FLAT BOARD PRESENT 4’ x 6’ BOARD 2. ‘Increase Visibility, etc.’’ The above drawings also serve to illustrate the added visibility made possible by the curvature of the convex board. Consideration of the question of visibility should not be restricted to players but should be viewed from the — SPECTATOR —— = < SEATS > a END COURT LINE _-~ Be oe G 54” FLAT BOARD MODIFIED 54” CONVEX BOARD standpoint of spectators as well. The gain in spectator visibility is immediately apparent when dotted lines in illustrations on back page are followed beyond the end court lines to include the area occupied by spectators. END COURT LINE _~ ae 2 CF 54” CONVEX BOARD 3. “(1) Increase space under basket from which goal may be made... (2) permit a rebounder to escape from congested area.”’ CLAIM No. 1 is enhanced by reason of curvature of convex board as illustrated below. NOTE: Because both left and right ends of convex backboard are turned away (back), the shooting area directly beneath the backboard is increased consider- ably. Likewise, the convex backboard eliminates the mental hazard represented by the edge of a straight or flat backboard, which hazard to the player is always present when agoalis attempted fromthe sides ofthe court directly opposite the board. CLAIM No. 2. Balls rebounding off of convex back- board will be found to cover a wider floor area than when rebounding from plain-or flat surface. This fact ‘‘Simplify bridgework, etc.’’ ~ A plane surface or convex surface backboard would enjoy this same advantage although it should be noted that the construction of a convex board automatically can be best proved by 15 minutes of demonstration or comparison test, and is considered an important factor in breaking up play in a congested area. provides a more rigid and generally stronger piece of equipment. 5. ‘‘More pleasing streamlined appearance ...a better target, thus promoting greater accuracy.”’ The above drawings conclusively illustrate the advan- tages of the modified 54” straight or flat backboard (and goal) as a better target than the present 4’ x 6’ board in use today. It follows that if maximum visibility from every possible shooting position on the playing floor makes for a better target, then the convex back™ board qualifies as a marked improvement over the same modified size board with a flat surface and that greater accuracy can be expected of the convex board. Your attention is respectfully directed to the following reproductions of letters received at our general offices in St. Louis. Each casts additional light on the convex backboard question. Because of the re- stricted distribution of this brochure, we feel justified in reproduc- ing these communications in this manner for whatever value they may have in supplying further data to the Rules Committee. We also enclose a very few of the many newspaper articles and other publicity that has come to our attention. We believe it opportune to express our appreciation for the co-operation of Mr. A. A. Schabinger of the Basketball Educational Bureau, whose regular work brought him to many of the coaching schools and conferences where we supplied a convex demonstration board, and where Mr. Schabinger very kindly assisted in acquainting those present with this new thought in backboard equipment. It is not our wish to inject our opinion of the convex board in this report. Results speak for themselves. However, we know, as a result of our many years experience in the manufacture and installation of back- stop equipment of all types, that the backboard is a small part of the total cost of the average suspended backstop installation. Consequently, if the proved advantages of the convex board justify your adopting it, no serious expense problem in effecting the change-over will result. March 29, 1940 USE OF 15 SPECIAL CONVEX BACKBOARDS RESULTS OF VOTES BY VISITING COACHES TO BASKETBALL COACHING SCHOOLS AFTER TESTING SAMPLE BOARDS COMMENTS BY COACHES AND OTHERS With skilled erection crews located in all major cities it was possible for us to include in our offer of a sample board to numerous Coaching Schools, YMCA's, etc., an offer to supply the labor necessary to dis- mantle existing equipment, install the demonstration board, and later return the owner's backboard to its original position. It should be noted, when considering the votes below, that in every in- stance it was impossible to obtain votes from all coaches attending the various schools. In some cases only a few of those present co-operated by filling in and forwarding the ballots. At other schools a majority of coaches in attendance complied with the request for an expression. Unfortunately, a few coaching schools accepted our offer of a convex demonstration board but failed to take a vote. However, it is believed that the significant factor in the results obtained was the large per- cent of favorable ballots cast for this new thought in backboards. IN ALL CASES THE ORIGINAL INDIVIDUAL VOTES RECEIVED AS A RESULT OF DEMONSTRATIONS WERE TABULATED AND DEPOSITED WITH MR. H. V. PORTER, SECRETARY, NATIONAL BASKETBALL COMMITTEE. Coaching Schools returning ballots and break-down of opinions are as follows: Total Votes in No Cast Favor Against Decision Butler University Coaching School Peul Hinkle Indianapolis, Indiana 5a 15 ie 5 University of Kentucky Coaching School Adolph Rupp Lexington, Kentucky 43 24 18 a Utah State University Coaching School Forrest Cox Logan, Utah of 55 4 x Duke University Coaching School Wallace Wade Durham, North Carolina LO 7 J. e University of Indiana Coaching School Branch McCracken Bloomington, Indiana oO i ne c Total Votes In No Cast Favor Against Decision Logansport Coaching School Cliff Wells . Logansport, Indiana 90 39 16 2 University of Colorado Coaching School Forrest Cox Boulder, Colorado 18 17 1 x Georgia Coaching School Forrest C. Allen Atlanta, Georgia i9 16 3 x Morningside College A. A. Schabinger Spirit Lake, Iowa Ro id 35 2 Colorado High School Coaches School Forrest Cox Denver, Colorado 5O 24 5 6 PFOTAL ~ <=—=----=-= 5628 245 85 de Percentage in favor of sample ...e22-- 677 Percentage against sample ..... (iccciweeeecs wo Percentage undecided ..ccccccccvccsscccccccccesecccs 2088 In addition to the foregoing report to Mr. Porter, demonstration backboards were supplied the following institutions, with votes, if any, as listed: Florida High School Coaches Association Paul D. Hinkle, Director Daytona Beach, Florida .......... (ae eG ue coseak ee No Vote Taken Long Island University Coaching School Clair Bee, Director Brooklyn, New York cececovcccecsccvccccccceeee -» 125 Coaches Present 58 voted in favor of convex board 14 voted against convex board 25 coaches undecided 95 - Total Vote University of North Carolina W. F. Lange, Director No Vote Taken Chapel Hii, N e G e eoeeeevoeeveeev ee eeeeveeevevee7eeeeeeee ‘e (See Letter Following ) West Virginia University Dyke Reese, Director Morgantown, West Virginia .....+.6. bese adeteeuss BO Voce taren so oe Kansas High School Coaches Association KE. A. Thomas Topeka, Kansas eeceteegeeseweeeesenvneeeeaeeee Vote sent direct to Mr. Porter. Large percentage in favor of convex board. Williamsport Y.M.C.A. J.M.Good, Director (Member Rules Committee) Williamsport, Penn. Vote by "Y" members, Industrial League Players, High School and College Players, and Professional Players. Coaches 13 voted in favor of convex board 3 voted against convex board _& coaches undecided 18 - Total votes by Coaches Players 178 voted in favor of convex board 40 voted against convex board _19 players undecided 237 - Total Votes by Players Ballots supplied Coaches and players were of this type: Coaches, the National Basketball Rules Committee, and Equipment Manufacturers have joined forces in a cooperative effort to find the right solution to the question of what design, size, etc., backboard will best serve today’s type of game. What is your opinion? It is generally recognized that the present 4’ x 6’ flat backboard designed for playing condi- tions of several decades ago is now obsolete and inadequate for today’s game. Cooperation be- tween several parties has made it possible for you to gain a first-hand acquaintance with the modified Do You Favor the Modified Backboard on Exhibit? Cormega es PRA Z 4 . * pinion ? board on display and you are invited to express your opinion of this special demonstration board. Suggestions for improvements or changes are in order. Similar demonstration backboards are being tested in Coaching Schools this Summer and all comments, recommendations, etc., from Coaches will be tabulated and the results transmitted to the Research Committee of the National Basketball Committee of the United States and Canada. Your opinion will be appreciated. we Vv YOUR ‘ CITY Catt NAME oer ee appress/3 7 ite Al STATE WA er, etack and mailto red Medgrt - - 3535 DeKalb Street - - St. Louis, Mo. Pica Gon. €. La Op peek. : NATIONAL COLLEGIATE A. A. - CHAIRMEN OF SUB-COMMITTEES Executive H. H. Satmon, Jr. Research Forrest C. ALLEN Complete List of Committee Members F. C. Allen Univ. of Kansas Lawrence, Kansas John Brown, Jr. 347 Madison Ave. New York, New York John Bunn Stanford Univ. Palo Alto, California Forrest Cox * Colorado University Boulder, Colorado J. H. Crocker Univ. of Western Ontario London, Ont., Canada M. C. Cunningham High School Desloge, Missouri Sumner A. Dole Connecticut State College Storrs, Connecticut J. Mark Good Sun-Gazette Co. Williamsport, Pennsylvania E. J. Hickox Springfield College Springfield, Massachusetts A. F. Jefferesa 114 Carrick Ave. Hamilton, Ont., Canada Frank P. Maguire Dept. of Public Instruction Harrisburg, Pennsylvania H. G. Olsen Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio Curtis Parker Centennary College Shreveport, Louisiana H. V. Porter 11 S. LaSalle St. Chicago, Illinois Floyd A. Rowe Board of Education Cleveland, Ohio J. W. St. Clair Southern Methodist Univ. » Texas H. H. Salmon, Jr. 40 Wall St. New York, New York Oswald Tower - Andover, Massachusetts Publication Oswatp Tower Questionnaire H. V. Porter Game Administration Sumner A. Dote C:ANADIAN I. A. U. and A. B. A. NATIONAL FEDERATION H. S. A. A. - Y. M. C, A. - NATIONAL BASKETBALL COMMITTEE of the UNITED STATES and CANADA Vice CHairman, JOHN BUNN Stanford Univ., Palo Alto, Calif. Treasurer, FLOYD A. ROWE Board of Education, Cleveland, Ohio Evitorn, OSWALD TOWER Andover, Massachusetts Cuairman, H. H. SALMON, Jr. 40 Wall St., New York, N. Y. Secretary, H. V. PORTER 11 S. LaSalle St., Chicago, Illinois Williamsport, Pa. Tuesday Dec. 26, 1939 Dear Mr. Weinsettels- Very glad to hear the new convex board is meet- ing favorable reception throughout the country. The enclosed Statistics represent a sumwary of the check made while the board was on display and used here at Williamsport Y.M.C.A: Coaches Approved 7 Disapproved Non-Commital 18 13 = 3 2 Players " / " # 40 19 237 178 These figures represent a check among Y members, Industrial League playefs, high school and college players and several professi players Has Penn State returned the board? I talked with Dre Scnott a couple jwe¢ks ago and he was not certain just what arrangements Coach Jo lawther had made. I am not \i/n a position to state what the agenda will be for the National Rules Committee meeting, but I see nothing to prevent your submitting statistics on the board or asking for permission te appear before the board members. Respectfylly, /- a. J elle Good, News Editor, Sun. B. T. GROVER, OHIO UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT THE NATIONAL Assg@im DR. JAMES A. NAISMITH, UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS OFFICERS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS . T. Grover, P me HOLMAN, First Vice-President NELSON NORGREN, Second Vice-President Duman, Third Vice-President EDWARD i Hickox, FRANK W. Y ean, Editor BOARD OF DIRECTORS W. S. CHANDLER Marsh Dresoip W. H. Browne VaL. LENTZ EDITOR OF BULLETIN FRANK W. Kw@ANsY, State College, Kingston, R. I. MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE BLaIR GULLION, Cornell University, Chairman OsBORNE Co outh Kar. J. LAWREN University - DAHLBERG, Montana State H. A. Hosson, Oregon University BASKETBALL RULES COMMITTEE Don WHitTs, Connecticut State, Chairman Forrest C. ALLEN, Kansas University Sam Barry, Southern California ~~ B. FRIEL, COACHING ETHICS COMMITTEE C. B. Hoy, South Dakota University, Chairman i Be eee Zz: University JosEPH Lapemnit, St. Johns University Roti F. WillzAles, Iowa University VISUAL INTERPRETATION COMMITTEE Nat. HOLMAN, Ci N. Y., Chairman W. H. Browns, Nebrasks University a Stanford poet ad Cxuuck TAYLoR, Converse Rubber Co. RESEARCH COMMITTEE on EDWARDS, Missouri University, Chairman . C. CARLSON, ter eg University DzAN, Stanf ph cae ed BLarm GULLION, Cornell U; University HIGH SCHOOL. COMMITTEE Joun Tracy, St. Ignatius High, Chicago OFFICIALS COMMITTEE Forrest Cox, Colorado University, Chairman W. J. Foon, 2 St. J College, i Ray OOSTING, ky elines Contig E. L. ROMNEY, gi State CONVENTION COMMITTEE Forrest C. ALLEN, Kansas University, Chairman GEORGE EDWARDS, Missouri Universi H. W. BRownse, Nebraska University CONVENTION DISPLAYS E. A. KELLEHER, Fordham University, Chairman TOURNAMENT AND OLYMPIC COMMITTEE H. G. OLSON, Ohio State ete, Chairman F. C. ALLEN, Kansas University JOHN W. BUNN, Stanford University PRESS COMMITTEE Pau. D. HINnkKLs, Butler University, Chairman NAT. HOLMAN, CITY COLLEGE, N. Y. HONORARY PRESIDENT FIRST VICE PRESIDENT MSKETBALL COACHES ete te Weese EDWARD J. HICKOX, SPRINGFIELD COLLEGE SECRETARY-TREASURER March 13, 1940 Fred Medart Manufacturing Coc, Potomac & De Kalb Sts., Saint Louis, Mo. Dear Mr. Weinzettel; Thank you most heartily for sending us a backboard for our basketball floor. This has been put up in our gymnasium and has already been very popularly received. Both the players and our basketball class members have liked the backboard. We shall give it more use in the coming week as we prepare for our participation in the #&Cc.A.A.Tournament in Indianapolis. Later I shall see that it is properly boxed and returned to you. Undoubtedly, discussion of this board will come up at our meeting in Kansas City and I shall be giad to carry to it the feeling of our students and of myself. Most sincerely yours, DWARD Jé /HICKOX COACH CF BWSKETBALL EJH: SPRINGFIELD COLLEGE NATIONAL COLLEGIATE A. A. NATIONAL FEDERATION H. S. A. A. Y. M. C, A. ‘CANADIAN I. A. U. and A. B. A. CHAIRMEN OF SUB-CO NATIONAL BASKETBALL COMMITTEE of the UNITED STATES and CANADA MMITTEES Vice Carman, JOHN BUNN Sy . Pies A Cuainman, H. H. SALMON, Je. Stanford Univ., Palo Alto, Calif. oe : 40 Wall St., New York, N. Y. Treasurer, FLOYD A. ROWE oes es —— Secretary, H. V. PORTER Board of Education, Cleveland, Ohio ee 11 S. LaSalle St., Chicago, Illinois Eviror, OSWALD TOWER Game Administration Andover, Massachusetts Sumner A. Doug Complete List of Committee Members John Brown, Jr. 347 Madison Ave. New York, New York John Bunn Stanford Univ. Palo Alto, California Forrest Cox Colorado University lorado J. H. Crocker Univ. of Western Ontario London, Ont., Canada M. C. Sumner A. Dole Connecticut State College Storrs, Connecticut J. Mark Good Sun-Gazette Co. January ll, 1940. Mr. R. E. Weinzettel, Sales Promotion Manager, Fred Medart Manufacturing Co., St. Louis, Mo. Dear Mr, Weinzettel: This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of January 8. iy observation has been that the reaction to your backboard has been favorable in places where it has been demonstrated, You may be sure that due consideration will be given to it by our Committee next March. Williamsport, Pennsylvania E. J. Hickox Springfield College Springfield, Massachusetts A. F. Jefferess 114 Carrick Ave. Hamilton, Ont., Canada ¥rank P. Maguire Dept. of Public Instruction Harrisburg, Pennsylvania H. G. Olsen Ohio State University Columbus,.Ohio Surtis Parker Centennary College Shreveport, Louisiana H. V. Porter 11 S. LaSalle St. Chicago, Illinois Cleveland, Ohio J. W. St. Clair Southern Methodist Univ. Dallas, Texas H. H. Salmon, Jr. 40 Wall St. New York, New York Yswald Tower Andover, Massachusetts Very truly yours, Baths hecay STANFORD UNIVERSITY OFFICE OF THE DEAN OF MEN STANFORD UNIVERSITY, CALIFORNIA December 28, 1939 Mr. R. E. Weinzettel Fred Medart Manufacturing Company Potomac and DeKalb Streets St. Louis, Missouri Dear Mr. Weinzettel: This will acknowledge your inquiry of December 20. The basketball backboard which you so kindly sent us here at Stanford has been set up on our court. I have had occa- sion to attend several rules interpretation meetings this year. At each of these I have called attention to the back- board you sent us. Many coaches, players, and spectators Have come to see the board. We have left it set up off our court during the games we have played so far this season so that people could see it. The players and coaches have used it from time to time. I have received many satisfactory comments concerning x the board and no criticisms of it. It does permit a person sitting directly behind the board to see the ball go through the basket. This is because the basket sits so near the bottom of the board, so from the standpoint of vision from all parts of the bleachers, I believe the board is quite sat- isfactory. I might say that I was agreeably surprised. From the standpoint of the players, I think the use of the board is a matter of adjustment. It does not take long for one to become accustomed to these new dimensions. The curved surface of the board, so far as I can tell, has no dif- ferent effect upon the ball than does the flat surface of the ordinary board. I believe the only serious problem in connection with the introduction of this board is the expense. This is some- thing to which the Rules Committee must of necessity give care- ful consideration. I am not now sure whether it would be ad- visable to permit the use of this board and the present 4 x 6 backboard. You can see, therefore, that the whole problem is one of expense in the change of equipment. Cordially yours, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL,N.C. DEPARTMENT OF PuysicaAL EpucaTIOn AND ATHLETICS R. A. FETZER DIRECTOR September 25, 1959 Mr. R. E. Weinzettel Medart Manufacturing Company Saint Louis, Missouri Dear Sir: I am writing you regarding the new basketball backboard and goal which you directed for our inspection this summer. : We used it during coaching school and were impressed with it. I cannot offer you a lot of individual impressions but whatever the comment was it was favorable from the men here. I should like to see it tried before passing further judgment. We appreciated the opportunity to observe it and try it out this summer. Sincerely, Y. 3. Karpey W. F. Lange Basketball Coach WFL/K Department of Physical Education Harry G. CARLSON Ths a ity me Cc ‘ah iat d i. ATHLETIC STAFF Director and Baseball BeRNarp F. OAKEs ‘WALTER B. FRANKLIN Football ! FRANK Potts Assistant Director and ak cated Graduate Manager JOHN MASON CLARENCE L, ECKEL Wrestling, Ass’t Football Chairman Athletic Board Cease C. Henry SMITH Gymnastics and Faculty Athletic Physical Education R ntative ForRREsT B. Cox — Basketball and Intramurals Howakp E. WAITE Corrective a@ iner vv - JS Boulder, Colorado u e July «6th, esol f (yee Loe ! Nf 2, poe? - 2 2 2 ir. HR. E. weinzettel, Sales “anager Sc fred Medert Manufacturing Compnny ; St. Louis, Missouri Deur Mr. V.einzettel: I have your letter of July £4, 4% which you in: uire of the reaction to the convex boérd# You will be interested to kno: taat out of 16 couches trying out this bourd, only one voted . egeinst iis sdostion...Mr. Schabinzger no doubt acquainted you wita tne vote of the coacnes at the Logan, Utah School. 4 am to conduct « Corching Class in basketball in Denver on august cl, end later in Topeka, Kanses from iugust EE to £6. “ail Writing Mr. ©. A. Thomas, head of the High Schocl Athletic association to see if he would be interested in having the convex board for this School. If not, I will Ship board iumediately. ilany thanks for shipping this board to us, and I em sure it has done a lot to hasten its adoption. orre.t B. Cox Director of Basketball Duke Unibersity DURHAM NORTH CAROLINA Department of Physier! Education and Athletics Wallace Wade, Director July 28, 1939 Mr. R. E. Weinzettel Fred Medart Manufacturing Co. Potomac and DeKalb Streets St. Louis, Mo. Dear Mr. Weinzettel: I am answering your letter of July 25 to Coach Wade regarding the backboard. I am sending in the result of the coaches vote to Mr. A. A. Schabinger. We tried the board in the school and most of the coaches seemed to be in favor of it. The board is crated up and ready for your direction at any time. Yours truly, c E. M. QYameron Basketball Coach EMC: H STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION EUGENE B. ELLIOTT, SUPERINTENDENT LANSING December 18, 1939 E, FORSYTHE, DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS MICHIGAN HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION Fred Medart Manufacturing Co. Potomac and DeKalb Streets St. Louis, Missouri Attention: R. E. Weinzettel Gentlemen: The folders which you forwarded to Mr. Riskey at Ann Arbor were placed on a table at the disposal of coaches and officials who desired to take them. In addition to that I indicated that there was a chance for them to express their opinions concerning the convex backboard and urged that they send them in to you. I realize that possibly not very many of them have done so but there seemed to be a very favorable reaction to the new type board. I also explained it and commented concerning it at seven Regional meetings which we held in the northern part of Michigan with the result that probably three hundred additional men know about the new type board. Yours truly, gS C. E. Forsythe C3 {=j kj wu LONG ISLAND UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES 300 PEARL STREET BROOKLYN, NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF ATHLETICS TELEPHONE: AND PHYSICAL EDUCATION TRIANGLE 5-621! CLAIR F. BEE, DIRECTOR September 20, 1939 ir. Re Ew Weinzettel Potomac and DeKalb Sts, Saint Lowis, Ho. liy dear Mr, Weinzettel; —_— vith respect to the EGotnalD board, my letter of Sentember 15 re to the large board with the convex surface, I feel I would prefer it to the flat surface, Sincerely, aq Clair Bee : Director of Athletics CB sHK INTERCOLLEGIATE ELIGIBILITY RULES EASH STUDENT MUST MAINTAIN SATISFACTORY ACADEMIC STANDING IN ORDER TO BE ELIGIBLE TO PARTICIPATE IN ATHLETICS. NO STUDENT MAY REPRESENT THE UNIVERSITY IN A MAJOR SPORT UNTIL HE HAS ATTAINED SOPHOMORE STANDING. STUDENTS WHO TRANSFER FROM OTHER COLLEGES OR UNIVERSITIES MUST COMPLETE ONE YEAR OF COLLEGE WORK AT LONG ISLAND UNIVER- SITY BEFORE THEY MAY PARTICIPATE IN MAJOR SPORTS. LONG ISLAND UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES 300 PEARL STREET BROOKLYN, NEW YORK September 15, 1939 Mr. R. E. Weinzettel Fred Medart Manufacturing Co. Potomac and De Kalb Streets St. Louis, Missouri My dear Mr. Weinzettel: Our school was composed of 125 members, 90 of whom gave us a report concerning the board. Sixty per cent of the coaches voiced their approval of this board while 25 per cent were non-committal and 15 per cent were opposed because of the cost in- volved in changing boards which are being used at present. Personally, I do not like the smaller type but feel that the ease board still gives us a larger target and enables us to shoot from the cor- ners. Sincerely yours, V7. Clair F. Bee Director of Athletics CFB: VCG Southern Methodist Mniversity Ballas , Texas January 8, 1940 Fred Medart Company i610 Brven Street Dallas, Texas Gentlemens: After seeing the smaller tyve backstop in experiment I feel that some tyve of backstop sm@ller than the one we nave now would be satis~ factory. wWoile I do not kiow that a smaller tyue seckstop either with curved or flat surface will oe auooted in the future I velieve thet a continued experiment on your part would be a great aid to wae Gasketvall Rules Conmittee, Youre truly, own, ’ ¢ t ds de Gly Siete Member of. {=tional weasketosll Committee JwWosm 2-14-40 ATLANTA JOURNAL PAI\ Cameron Advocates Convex Backboard By JOHN MARTIN The new-fangled ideas being proposed for basketball are just a lot of poppycot and should be treated as such in the opinion of Eddie Cameron, coach of’ Duke’s Southern ‘Conference leaders. In a radio interview here Tues- } day night (6:15) Cameron indi- cated he was willing to “let well enough alone” and keep on shoot- ing for the hoops = a backboard. ‘HOWEVER, ” be aimed, “I would not object at all to a change to conyex backboards. In fact, I’m in favor of them, and hope to see their introduction before many ‘more seasons.” But Columbia Maloney’s back- boardless idea won’t answer the cause for which it’s intended, Cam- eron argued in a Sports News and Views pow-wow. Most of the new suggestions are designed to minimize the superior- ity the tall player has over a man ,|of ordinary height. Backboardless basketball won’t. do it, but the. convex boards. will, Cameron explained. “You see,” he experted, “it’s the control of the rebound that has the boys stymied. As it is, with the straight boards, the tallest man has the big advantage. A curved bank would keep the ball in a more definite groove and smaller players would be better prepared to recover or capture it.” A Wem tee MO Say. A a ety ee . oars Aare CHICAGO DAILY NEWS 2-5-40 Th he Score Card-- A Day with the Hoosiers BY JAMES 8S. KEARNS. RANCH M’CRACKEN of Indiana University was in our town with his Hoosier basketball team Saturday. Mr. McCracken, a former great cager with I. U. quintets of other years, is a large, peaceful young coach. Peaceful, that is, except at courtside when his team is in a close one. Accompanying Branch were George Gardner, the Indiana pub- licist, and “Fergy”—Jessie Ferguson—who has been trainer of Indi- ana’s athletes since the last Monday in Feb- _ ruary, 1913. “And if you think I’m bad at a basket- ball game,” allowed Coach McCracken, “you should see that Fergy. He packs up his kit and goes down to the dressing room about five minutes before the end of a game if the score is at all close.” — “Yes,” agreed Fergy, “and at the rate basketball is going now, I’m thinking of staying in the dressing room for the whole second half. It will get a man—that crazy game.” : a * * McCracken smiled a little grimly and nodded at Fergy’s estimate of basketball. On the side one of his companions reported that in a game at Philadelphia Coach Mc- Cracken punched his hand through the seat of a folding chair in a moment of excite- ment. And that brought on a discussion of the nervous, pressure-laden breed of men in the basketball coaching profession— Piggy Lambert of Purdue who holds the world’s basketball coaches’ record for the broad jump from the bench to the middle of the floor; Tony Hinkle of Butler who suffers audibly for 40 minutes in each game, and George Keogan of Notre Dame who has mellowed some but who used to be one of the best hair-tearers in. the business. We asked McCracken what he thought about the present game of basketball, with special emphasis on the clamor that has arisen this winter to have the rules altered. “It’s all right the way it is,’ he said, “though possibly they might cut down the size of the backboards a little and round off the corners so that a shot which is completely wild wouldn’t rebound for a possible tip-in. But generally it’s a swell game, but tough on coaches.” BRANCH MC CRACKEN. mm Se hy amend = Tay ee mee Curved Backboard on Display at Cage Clinic. Arrangements were completed E yesterday with the Fred Medart Manufacturing Company of St. Louis to place one of the new “streamlined” curved-surface back- boards on display as an added at- traction at the free basketball clinic planned by The Star at the Butler University Field House Aug. 18. Because of a change in the rules, requiring a space of four feet be- tween the backboard and the end line of the court instead of only two feet, the modified backboard developed after several months of experimental work, has been en- dorsed by many coaches because: 1. It will permit freer use of the four-foot end space. 2. It will increase the zone of Visibility on the playing floor for spectators at the ends of the gymnasium. 3. It will relieve congestion in the foul lane by making it neces- sary for players to cover a wider area to control rebounds. 4, And it will simplify the bridgework for supporting back- boards because of its reduced weight. The rectangular backboard in use at the present time is 72 inches wide and 48 inches high. The one shown in the accompanying re- production is 54 inches wide and | 32 inches high with rounded cor-|; ners and a curved surface made by / bending the sides away from the basket. Forrest C. (Phog) Allen, Kansa {University coach, has termed th new backboard a ‘marvelous ide EW BASKETBL + BORD EXHIBITION Y. M. C. A. Sho wing Stream- to. increase scoring opportuniti lin ‘ from the corner of the court, R a Banking Board. | “ules to Be Discussed. INDIANAPOLIS STAR 1 Centeal Pennsylvania ba ‘ 9-11-39 oh ae and fans will get th, etball Preview of the « Cir in- basketball] : streamlineq” the Y. Mw : AIRE board tonight at The first cat _— “pe ts stan i — ee! 40 years ago, mag . will Te ecein ramental Stages Committee, ‘he national erected Frid favorable aa gue cagers who has received ment from cj — tried x Ee tations have bee ? n = intercollegiate na se es and Players in thi one JABS —By— C. L. (POSS) PARSONS Sports Editor DENVER, COLO. 8-18-39 eresavs danke cieesgenuuseaunaeeasianbcoocesiqaevsnea’ nenge aqncaazegea ot New Convex Bankboard Basketball in 1941 may find the new stream- lined convex bankboard being adopted by the rules committee. This new board is being experi- mented with all over the country at the sugges- tion of the rules committee and the Basketball Coaches association. According to Forrest Cox, basketball coach at the University of Colorado, the new board has met with favor at various coaching schools. At Utah State, where Cox conducted the basketball instruction, only three mentors out of sixty at- tending the school didn’t like the new board. In ‘a baskétball class at the C. U. summer school, seventeen out of eighteen had a preference for the new board over the flat board now in use after trying it out for themselves. Coach Cox will keep one convex bankboard at C. U. for experimentation purposes of his varsity players during the coming school year. How Board Is Made The convexity of this new board is four inches and begins at the median plane of the board and curves outward to the sides of the board, which is three feet from the median plane. The original convex bankboard has retained the six-foot width dimension of playing surface and likewise the four-foot height dimension. The inventors have assumed a fourteen-foot radius of eurvature to be ideal, as the angle of incident and reflection ‘on this are does not vary greatly from the con- ventional flat plane. Since the latest change in the rules permits. the extension of the end zone for an additional ‘two feet, practically all the new schools laying out basketball courts are taking advantage of this new ruling. This allowable increase in thé end zone increases the blind spots, or ‘‘coffin eor- ners,’? which while allowing greater freedom of movement or play, insofar as the offense is con- cerned, does markedly change the defense, owing to the fact that the basket is now plainly set out so there is no metal hazard from the projecting straight side of the bankboard. It is the thought of the inventors that this board will revolutionize the offensive play in the end zone. By increasing the scoring zone it must necessarily follow that the defense must spread, out. resulting in more open and much faster play in the end zone. Points in Favor Following are some points in favor of the new convex bankboard: For a straight shot to the goal the scoring zone is, figuratively, increased by twenty-seven square feet. For a bank shot contacting the bank three inches from the edge, the scoring zone is increased 720 square feet. The mental hazard of attempting a shot from the sideline, directly parallel to the bank, is elim- inated, owing to the recession of the vertical edge of the bank, allowing unobstructed visibility of the goal. The visibility to spectators is greatly increased beyond the end zone due to the recession of the vertical edge, thereby opening up large areas which heretofore had been obscure. The convex shape of the bank results in a unit of much greater strength and rigidity, thereby causing rebounds to land a greater distance from the basket and opening up the congested regions around the basket. * KK * At Harvard University, a demonstration game was played before 1500 coaches and players and the regu- lation backboard was used on one end and on the other a board of the new proposed size and shape and with a convex surface. Despite the fact that the teams had not practiced with the convex surface, the percentage of successful shots was higher on the convex board. This is another indication of the great power of adaptation on the part of players. They seem to have an instinctive ability to quickly. adjust themselves to any reasonable reaction of the ball, to different courts and different type backboards or baskets. ILL. HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETE JAN-FEB. 1940 FRED MEDART MANUFACTURING Co. POTOMAC AND DE KALB STREETS SAINT Louris, Mo. RE. WEINZETTEL SALES PROMOTION MANAGER June 14 1940 3 Dr. Forrest C. Allen University of Kansas Lawrence, Kansas Dear Phog: I have your two letters of the 12th and enjoyed the personal one immensely. I am indebted to Mrs, Allen for reminding you of that bet because frankly I think we are going to collect. I showed your letter to Bill and he promptly called attention to the fact that you failed to mention a bet of equal size that you have with him on the same question. I dislike spoiling a fellow's day this way but have no choice in the matter, with Bill sitting across from my desk with a great big grin on his face. I too heard F.D.R's address Monday from Charlottesville and got much the same reaction you mention. Our local St. Louis newspaper, the St. Louis Post Dis- patch, carried a four column editorial the following day in which they heavily censured the President for his remarks and accused him of ‘carrying the United States to the brink of war.’ I am no pacifist either, Phog, and if there was a way - and frankly I an afraid their isn't - to keep out of this mess, I think we should do so. You interesting description of the activities of the members of your family is appreciated. I wish for each of your youngsters, success in their respective undertakings, although I am sure — judging from the two members of your family whom I have met =- that noe of them require the support of my wishes to reach their goal. Speaking of youngsters, there is a little fellow of about 6'3" in my family who gives promise of being a pretty fair basketball player. He indicates a leaning toward chemistry. I know K.U. is the place for basketball, but how about the chemistry set-up and kindred subjects at your institution? Seriously, Phog, I am going to have to make the selection here in about one more half year and have been giving a little more thought to the question offchools as that time draws near. I think Mr. McElroy misses the fact that in Goal-Hi we eliminate the strenuous nature of regular basketball and therefore our regular Goal-Hi rules should be satisfactory for use by the girls, I of course refer to the shuttling back and forth over a regulation basketball court. We are at this time going to press with a large sheet including -botir same strong advertising pranotion behind Goal-Hi and also including a number of variations STEEL LOCKERS___ STEEL WARDROBES____STEEL SHELVING____GYMNASIUM APPARATUS____GYM SEATS____ BASKETBALL BACKSTOPS____PLAYGROUND APPARATUS FRED MEDART MANUFACTURING Co. #2 Dr. Forrest C. Allen Lawrence, Kansas for playing Goal-Hi as a mass play-game rather than a sport. As a result of the questionnaire we smt out, we found that most of the users were working with Goal-Hi as a play-game. In fact, a large percentage of them were doing so, and we thought we would make up this addition to the rules book without further delay and in all cases distribute a copy of it whenever we have oc- casion to forward a rules book to a customer or a prospect. I will be sure to send you one of these newly developed inserts as soon as they are avail- able from the printer. Send on the suggested write-up about the one bounce dribble and segmented court for girls' rules. Kindest vegards. Cordially yours, REW/AC