The matter of who would win is only incidental. After all, how many World Series have begun with one league's team a heavy favorite? Does this kill the fans' interest? Seems to me that the Yankees were heavy favorites this last time!
H.L. (MIKE) MICHAEL
As one of Ring Lardner's boys might say: "Let's get the serious started."
Although I agree with most of the editorial positions held by your magazine, I am definitely opposed to your suggestions concerning the Olympic Committee's new system of selecting our Olympic track and field team (SCORECARD, Dec. 16). Your stand, which advocates the retention of the "traditional American system," is shortsighted and unrealistic and in definite contrast to your drive for more liberal policies in all sports.
Suppose John Pennel, Bob Hayes and Al Oerter all suffered minor injuries prior to the exclusive Olympic trials and were unable to compete. If your position were supported, then these great world record holders would miss the trip to Tokyo. The new system would prevent such an occurrence and would, furthermore, consider such factors as past competitive records, physical conditions and other significant performance trends that the past selective system neglected completely.
The Olympic Games serve as the testing grounds for the ultimate in athletic competition. Only if the greatest athletes are present can this be realized. The liberal selection system developed by the U.S. Olympic Committee is without question one of the most significant developments in American track and field history and will insure Americans our finest Olympic team in 1964.
SPORTS ILLUSTRATED is serving a valuable and useful purpose in this time of hysteria by opposing unwise legislation for registration of firearms (SCORECARD, Dec. 9).
Indeed, the record shows that areas with the most stringent firearms registration laws, such as New York, frequently if not invariably have the highest incidence of crimes of violence, including those perpetrated by firearms.
Conversely, areas which have no firearms registration statutes frequently if not invariably have the lowest incidence of crimes of violence and the lowest incidence of crimes involving firearms.
I know of no legislation before the Congress to restrict the sacred right of individuals to possess and to use firearms in a lawful manner which would have prevented the tragic death of President Kennedy.
Indeed, the gun which shot the President could have been acquired at a police auction, in a pawnshop, from a local wholesale or retail outlet, by borrowing from a friend, by inheritance from a parent or relative, by importation from a foreign country, through theft from a federal or state armory, by burglary of a store or home, through the small but active traffic in illicit firearms, as a war trophy from abroad or in many other ways which your readers could conceivably imagine.