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