New York doesn't deserve Fran Tarkenton (Quarterback on the Run, July 17 et seq.). Giant fans booed Charlie Conerly and Y.A. Tittle. So I bet that Tarkenton, despite his great ability, will get similar treatment.
EDGAR M. FRIED
South Charleston, W. Va.
Your SCORECARD, "Unnecessary Roughness" (July 3), once again shows us a public official interested in publicity and headlines rather than the apprehending of real criminals.
In regard to Mr. William Cahn's expose of a college coach who has allegedly been gambling on his own team, this sensational disclosure is based on wire-tapped conversations between a bettor and a bookie, one of whom is trying to justify his backing of a certain team by stating that the coach was betting himself.
Bettors and bookies alike, trying to prove that they are smart and to let everyone know that they are "in the know," drop names. A concrete example: beginning on the Wednesday before last fall's Michigan State-Notre Dame game, the point spread on Michigan State started going up from three points. The spread reached eight points right before game time. The reason for this influx of money on Notre Dame, among "the smart guys," was that the Notre Dame coach was supposed to be betting on his own team.
This rumor grew and grew, until right before game time everyone wanted to bet on Notre Dame. Of course, the Notre Dame coach, who probably never made a bet in his life, was the only one who knew that his No. 1 halfback, All-America Nick Eddy, was out of the game and wouldn't play a minute. So this is one time the boys really got fooled.
As for any college coach betting, I don't think Cahn has any information or actual proof to this effect, and I submit the question: "Why would any coach add to his woes by being so stupid as to bet?" His very life and existence depend on the outcome of every game that his team plays. Would a coach be so foolish as to add betting to the intense pressure he is working under at all times?
Being a bookie myself, I can assure you that no bookie, member of a syndicate (a much misused and abused word used by crime commissions, publicity-seekers et al.) or anyone else is going to pull a gun on any citizen and threaten his life, forcing said citizen to make a bet on the outcome of a sports event.
OL�S AND WHISTLES
John McCormick's Ten Toreros in Need of a Bull (July 24) was an authoritative discussion of San Isidro, the other festivals and especially of the bulls. His style is cold, hard and with no nonsense for the uninformed; he writes for the seasoned aficionado who wants good reports of the bulls with his morning bowl of gazpacho. The beginner should cut out the glossary he provided, paste it on the wall and memorize it for future reviews.
Mr. McCormick's impressions, however, should not go completely unchallenged. He said, for example, that Antonio Ord��ez is "the best when he wants to be." Ord��ez is the best, period. If he has become somewhat careless with his kills, it is, as the author carefully states, because he is 35, rich and justly disdainful of a public that has become bored with his perfection and has taken cheap pop artists like El Cordob�s to its heart.
When I traveled with Ord��ez' cuadrilla in the 1961 season through arrangement by Ernest Hemingway, Antonio was at the zenith of his career. The public loved every move he made, and he usually made the right ones. Since then, Paco Camino and El Viti have emerged stronger than ever before and Monde�o has returned, to complete the group of purists.