The Swings of Babe Ruth and Ty Cobb. Why aren’t there More of Them?

“Imitation is the best form of flattery” –Charles Caleb Colton

Babe Ruth and Ty Cobb

Babe Ruth with Ty Cobb

In the annals of sports the names Ty Cobb and Babe Ruth carry weight. Their accomplishments and fame extending far beyond the baseball diamond. Cobb was considered the best who ever played the game. And then came Ruth. Ruth is generally recognized as the greatest athlete of the 20th Century (or at least Top 3). Both Cobb and Ruth were well-rounded in their baseball skills. Cobb could run the bases like no one before, or since. Ruth was a record-setting pitcher before being moved to the outfield in order to better take advantage of his hitting. Ruth and Cobb made their names as hitters.

What has always fascinated and bewildered me is that in spite of their prolific accomplishments at the plate Ruth and Cobb had no imitators. Since their time as icons of baseball in the early 20th Century no one else has come along emulating some of Ruth and Cobb’s unique styles. I see this a lot in life. People come along in various fields and do something different from what everyone else is doing and they accomplish great things. And…then…nothing. No one follows the Master. No one imitates that which well accomplished people perform and subsequently continue with similar success. I’ve often wondered why that is.

Ruth’s batting stance featured him standing in the batters box with his spindly little legs and feet together, holding the bat very low, his hands at about waist level. He then stepped into the pitch, raised his bat and unleashed a powerful swing using his entire body for greater force. His follow through left his body twisted in such contortion that he resembled a human barber’s pole.

Babe Ruth

Several aspects of this stance and swing have never been duplicated. And yet when he finished playing Ruth’s 714 career home runs were so overwhelming that 2nd place on the career home run list was Lou Gehrig with less than half Ruth’s total.

Because of the age in which Cobb played video and photo’s of his “style” are much more rare. But what is certain is that Cobb swung the bat with a split grip. He says it gave him better control of the bat, as you would expect by simple analysis and the laws of leverage. Instead of holding the bat during his swing with his hands near the bat’s base, side-by-side with each other or slightly overlapped like all other hitters, Cobb gripped the bat with one hand NEAR the base and the other 3-5 inches higher on the handle.

Ty Cobb with a split grip

He retired with 4189 hits in 24 seasons. In 500 more career games Pete Rose finally surpassed Cobb’s total, finishing with 4256. Rose and Cobb are the only ball players to ever exceed 3800 hits. Still, do you ever see a hitter swinging the bat with Cobb’s split grip? I watch a lot of baseball. I don’t see it.

For thirteen years I worked in sales for a 30-year-old company in Bellevue, WA before starting my company Total Broadcasting Service. I’m proud to say I led all the company’s 40+ person sales staff in annual sales for the last seven years of my employ. With all humility I set every sales record the company recorded and outsold whomever was in second place usually by 15-20%. My success wasn’t based on longevity as most of the company’s top sellers were with the company before I began in 1992. It wasn’t based on any kind of favoritism. Nobody would EVER have accused my Sales Manager or General Manager of grantingme any favors. My success came from a presentation style and from a manner in which I managed my accounts that was unlike anyone else. I always tried to share my methods with others. But few were interested, and none adopted them. It perplexes me to this day.

Many if not most of my sales accomplishments with my company and the one I worked for previously are done over the phone, inside-sales. The less knowledgeable would call it telemarketing. The profession is held by some in similar esteem as that of lawyers, politicians, and professional thieves. That might be an exaggeration. But the point is, recruiting people to the industry has been a constant challenge in the 20 years in which I’ve been employed in it. This in spite of a life and lifestyle which is the envy of many. But do as I do? Seemingly the answer is “not me”.

Are there a lot of Pablo Picasso imitators out there?

Les Demoiselles d'Avignon. Oil on Canvas (244 ...

His Cubist style of painting was radical and became beloved; and he is renowned as THE painter of the 20th Century. Yes, some have attempted Cubist stylings. But they’re rare compared to other forms of abstract paintings. What about Steve Jobs? His over-emphasis on style contributed to Apple computer pricing far exceeding that of a computer with the more popular Window’s operating system. But that specific emphasis on style and appearance spreading to Apple’s other hardware products is a major reason Apple is now the richest company in the world. Any yet…do any other computer manufacturers place ANY emphasis on their hardware’s style and appearance? Not really.

And before I hear from detractors, I don’t equate me or my accomplishments with those of Ruth, Cobb, Picasso or Jobs. I’m merely relating personal experiences and observations that are first hand.

I could go on and on. It’s true that a “Master’s” uniqueness is part of what makes them special. But in measured accomplishments where a success approach is capable of being emulated it should be. Imitation may be the highest form of flattery. But all things considered, we should be flattering our most successful people more often. Is there someone in your field who far exceeds the accomplishments of the masses? My advice is to find out what they do and how they do it and copy or imitate as much as you possibly can.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

Lead your industry with video. Call us.

Republicans are Stepping into Obama’s Bear Trap!

George Stephanopoulos

George Stephanopoulos

When George Stephanopoulos quizzically asked Mitt Romney whether state’s could ban contraception during an ABC News televised Republican Presidential Debate in January we were witnessing the first bear trap laid in the woods by the Obama administration in their hopes of having GOP Presidential candidates decisively put their foot in it. On that night Romney didn’t, in spite of Stephanopoulos’s dogged effort to get him to do so. He was clearly stunned by the question and saw no relevance in it.

Mitt Romney at one of his presidential campaig...

GOP front-runner Mitt Romney

He adeptly avoided committing himself to a dangerous anti-contraception, anti-woman position from which Obama would string him from a tree like a hunting prize.

Unfortunately since that time Republicans have repeatedly put their foot squarely in the steel jaws of Obama’s Machiavellian plot. Once again Obama has proven himself to be one of the most thoroughly cut-throat politicians ever to occupy the White House. Chicago trained him well.

Shortly after Stephanopoulos’ covert opening volley, Obama announced the H-H-S plan to have church owned organizations, specifically the Catholic church,

St. Peter's Basilica at Early Morning

St. Peter's Basilica

supply contraception and the morning-after pill to their workers free of charge. AND THEN he quickly amended the policy to make it so the church’s insurance company’s paid for the contraception. In doing so Obama revealed his political motivation. He wanted to introduce the more extreme position as a track official would want to fire his starting gun to signal that runners should begin running. He wanted the debate, the fight. Again, he put politics ahead of country, dividing our country and creating controversy where none existed. He tailored his argument, and coached his Democratic minions to make the argument about a woman’s right to have contraception.

Should the Catholic church have contraception prohibited from the insurance coverage of all its employees in their churches, hospitals, colleges and universities no woman would be denied contraception. Those church employees could still get contraception on their own; they could still buy their own private insurance policies; they could choose to work for some company or organization that has beliefs and policies in line with their values and that does provide contraception coverage; and as shocking as this suggestion may be they could choose to refrain from sex until such time as they are ready to have a child. (I’m not advocating any of these options. I’m just correctly pointing out that choices do exist. The fact that the choices for the individual may be less desirable than being given something for free is immaterial.)

U.S. Senate Republicans introduced a bill that would exempt churches AND private businesses from providing contraception or other medical procedures in their employees insurance coverage if the leader or leaders of the business have a religious or moral objection. The measure was narrowly defeated 51-49; for which I am grateful. The legislation was a tremendous over-reach by Republicans too distracted by a big steel clamp around their ankles. A trap engraved with Barrack Obama‘s signature.

English: Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh

Conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh was also encumbered by the bear trap when he referred to a Georgetown University Law Student as a “slut” and a “prostitute”. The woman’s testimony before a Democratic Senate panel advocating free contraception WAS laughable. But in trying to laugh and make others laugh Limbaugh went too far and too crude, as he so often does. And he again turned the discussion back to a woman’s right to birth control rather than religious freedom.

It’s all so pathetic. I hope Romney continues to avoid the subject.

Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2012

And all other Republicans should wise up and refuse to discuss the matter further. The media is Obama’s tool to manipulate and Republicans can’t win for losing. Any discussion of the matter will be turned by Democrats AND by the media into a false debate over birth control an argument Republicans will always lose. Let the Catholic church defend itself. It can. And it will. The Catholic church is the largest church in America and the richest church in the world. They are more than capable of winning a judicial fight over Obama’s CLEAR violation of the Bill of Right’s 1st Amendment.

Obama didn’t want a 1st Amendment fight. He wants to win an election. He can’t win talking about the economy or his record. So he divided the country and changed the subject. He laid a trap. Republicans stepped in it. And what’s really scary is that it won’t be Obama’s last trap. Let’s hope Republicans avoid the clumsiness they’ve displayed around this one.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

Online Video as a Marketing Tool – NYTimes.com

Terrific Article from the New York Times on Online Video:

Online Video as a Marketing Tool – NYTimes.com.

The Democrat in Me.

 

GOP Florida Four  - Caricatures

I’ll be voting in the Washington State Republican Caucus on Saturday. This will be only the second caucus I’ve participated in since I became eligible to vote before the 1984 Presidential election. If you’re wondering, “Why so few?”. You have to remember Washington State is so screwed up politically, and especially in the GOP party they can never seem to decide what they want to do. We’ve had lots of GOP Primaries, combined party primaries, and caucuses. Now its caucuses.

 

I can’t imagine what Democrats like about their party and about Barrack Obama.

 

English: Barack Obama Deutsch: Barack Obama

I really can’t. It eludes me. Why would anyone want to be part of a party whose soul mission in life seems to be to take down the successful, while defending the bad and sometimes morally corrupt behavior that leads to many being unsuccessful (and supported by the successful). I’ve heard Ann Coulter suggest Liberalism is a disease. I don’t think it’s that. I think it’s because they don’t like the Republicans and some of the stupid things Republicans do, not that they like Democrats so much. And I have to admit they’ve got a fair gripe.

 

The most annoying of their gripes is that Republicans are racist. It’s not true. And it’s counter to American History. It was Republicans in the Congress that passed

 

Portrait of President Lyndon B. Johnson Deutsc...

Lyndon Johnson‘s Civil Rights legislation over the objections of southern Democrats. It was The newly formed Republican party that opposed slavery and elected Abraham Lincoln who freed the slaves.

 

But in today’s world the few racists who are left in this country do tend to find their home in the Republican party versus the Democrats. It’s not reflective of the party as a whole, but it does taint the GOP and I believe prevent more well-intentioned Democrats from voting our way. Until we as a party go out of our way to recruit black votes and show black voters how the Democrats have failed them all these years, while simultaneously making racists uncomfortable within the confines of the GOP this false taint will continue to hover over the party.

 

Republicans greatest sin in the past twenty years was the persecution of Bill Clinton. And it was a persecution. I was no fan of Clinton; never voted for him. But the Kenneth Starr investigation

, United States Solicitor General from 1989 to...

Image via Wikipedia

took years and millions of tax payer dollars and all he came up with was Clinton engaging in marital infidelity and then lying about it at a time after the Special Prosecutor had already been impaneled. It was a waste, it was embarrassing and it was a mark Democrats have held against Republicans ever since.

 

Clinton became President having received ONLY 43% of the popular vote in 1992. And I don’t think Republicans ever forgave him for that. Just like Democrats never forgave George W. Bush for winning the Presidency in 2000 by a mere 243 votes in florida. The Clinton win spawned the irrational persecution of the man. The impeachment spurred Democrat’s resentment. And the Bush narrow win made Democrats completely irrational.

 

I vote Republicans because I believe in smaller more limited government. From this standpoint Republicans talk a good game. But as Democrats correctly point out Republicans had control of Congress and the White House from 2001-2007 and did a lousy job walking-the-walk. They spent like they accuse Democrats of spending. Still, I’d rather have a politician who at least talks about limited government versus a Democrat who has no intention of limiting government. The point is Republicans have been hypocrites and Democrats are right to say so.

 

Lastly, Democrats think Republicans are mean and don’t care about helping the poor. Of course they’re wrong. Numerous studies have indicated that those who identify themselves as being Conservative give a far higher percentage of their incomes to charity, to help the less fortunate, than do those who identify themselves as Liberals or Progressive. And this in spite of Liberals having higher incomes than Conservatives, in recent decades.

 

But Democrats are right in having the concern because Republicans have done an absolutely lousy job of explaining how our positions and strategies and morals are far superior in helping the poor raise themselves from dependency to success. We’ve done a lousy job as Republicans of conveying our belief in our fellow human beings abilities to rise up. We have not property demonstrated how government entitlement encourages individual dependency, and that which the government provides will only keep us ALL poor. No entitlement program will make anyone rich. And none will enable the individuals to grow into more success. Their subsistence programs only. But they’re given to too many people.

 

Still I believe in Liberty. Look it up. I honestly believe most people don’t know its true meaning. If they did. They’d join me at the Republican caucuses Saturday.

 

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

 

If you find this blog interesting. Please share it. TY.

 

 

 

EDITORIAL: Obama’s goofy green gas – Washington Times

The Washington Times Printing & Distributi...

Washington Times building

My Conservative friends may find it surprising that I think we as a nation should go green. My Conservative friends would appreciate that I don’t think government should be directing that movement.

As gas prices sore past $4-per gallon President Obama acts helpless. But as is pointed out in this Washington Times editorial he doesn’t need to be standing in the way of us doing for ourselves what he refuses.

EDITORIAL: Obama’s goofy green gas – Washington Times.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

(Credit to Gds44’s blog where I first came across this commentary)