There are definitely commendable things about this book based on the sheer amount of experience that the author has amassed over the years. Diagrams are plentiful and of high quality. However ideas on pitching mechanics are not state of the art including old fashioned advocacy of pushing off the plate amongst other dinosaurs. Nor is it actually possible for a fastball to 'hop' as it used to thought. There are also things that are uncoventional such as dragging the back foot along the ground to gain better control. Yet there are other aspects of the book that make it definitely worthwhile taking a look at.

The good TV announcers use terms such as fastball, knuckleball, curveball, slider, screwball, split-finger fastball, forkball, change-up, off-speed, sinker, hop, two-seam, four-seam, and a host of other terms to describe pitches. How they can discern which type of pitch was thrown is not always obvious to the viewer. I became so interested in the mechanics of the different pitches that I went looking for a book on the subject. I found The Craft of Pitching by Larry Jansen who pitched for the New York Giants from 1947 to 1954. He was a National League All-Star in 1950 and 1951. He pitched in the 1951 World Series. He won more than 122 games, and went 21-5 in 1947 and 23-11 in 1951. He was a pitching coach for the San Francisco Giants from 1961 to 1971. Among his coaching credits are Hall-of-Famers Gaylord Perry and Juan Marichal, each of whom provided a foreword for Jansen's book. Jansen's book, published by Masters Press, shows that he is a grand master of the art of pitching. It will answer all your questions and a few you didn't know enough to even ask!

The text is well written and the diagrams of the drills are easily understood and implemented. The book breaks down the numerous drills by disciplines, (ie.. shooting, ball-handling, etc..), for easy use and reference. I have personally implemented over twenty drills into my Jr. High basketball program.

It started off great with an excellent history of how Karl Rove got mad from losing, a great motivator, and how he never gave up which is the true lesson from this book. I agree there were potshots at the republicans about what I'd expect from a talk show.

The discussion on the 2000 election fiasco was disappointing. The authors prefaced the chapter with stating that karen and karl just stood by during the recount. That's gotta be ... C'mon, his point man on being presidential simply took a vacation? Please. That was a silent admission as to the authors inability to fill-in the gaps.

I got Karl's motivations and experiences but after that the book simply dragged-on reporting what I got from glances at the news. Should have made it 50 pages smaller and $... cheaper.

I've started reading Bush's Brain, hopefully it will be better.

I expected a more insightful, more personal exploration of a genius political consultant -- Karl Rove -- what makes him tick, what motivates his Machiavelli-like agenda, what personal inconsistencies belie his political agenda etc. What I got was more of a "complaint" against the Republicans in general and "W" in particular. The authors seem to be writing from the point of view of sore losers who want to diminish the validity of the Republicans' political victories in Texas and on the national stage by painting Rove as an amoral Machiavelli/Svengali who has maninpulated an entire party (and country) to fit to his whims. As gossip, it's pretty good -- a lot of juicy tidbits and "could be true" explanations. As a study of a political genius, the authors don't really get at the heart of Karl Rove. Yes, he's brilliant. Yes, he's "The Man With The Plan" for the Republican party. Yes, he's sitting pretty right now. But that's all presupposed. We could get that from a New York Times article. The authors don't give us more than that -- nothing to explain or demystify the man behind the mystery. There are very few attempts at a more in-depth analysis. For example, the authors' mention briefly Rove's lack of religious inclination. It is a fascinating point considering Bush's moral compass. Yet, the authors don't really go anywhere with this information. It's left there to dangle in the wind.

Too bad, Rove is such an interesting subject. Maybe someone else will pick up where this book left off . . . .

I found "Boy Genius" to be insightful, compelling and humorous. The book is written by three journalists, two of whom followed Karl Rove throughout his days in Texas and a third who writes for the National Journal. The outline of the book is a chronological history of the campaigns and administrations Rove has managed or contributed to. The book is full of interesting antecdotes that really give you an idea of what Rove is all about and his motivations for the directions in which he takes his advisees. Most importantly, after reading this book I would describe Karl Rove as a winner, which makes this an interesting read no matter what your politics.

Two things the potential reader should know are 1) the majority of the book is about Texas politics and Rove's work in that state, and 2) the authors demonstrate definite left leanings in their storytelling, although it mainly shows through in their humor and when they point out the irony that George W. Bush never fails to provide for them. These caveats are fairly minor, I think most political readers will enjoy this one.

I enjoyed this book very much. The morals and lessons it teaches you are very important. It is the story of a lonely man, who because he was falsely accused of stealing and because this cost him all his relationships with people, he secluded himself in his lonely house along with all his gold that he saved up. He never spent his money because he enjoyed its company. His gold was his only companion for several years of his life. Then one day, he was robbed, and he no longer had anything worth living for.
Silas was slowly dying of misery and depression. He had no reason to live. Then one day a little girl walked into his house and into his life. Her mother died, leaving the baby girl as an orphan. So, Silas adopted her and took her into his home. She grew up a poor, hard-working girl who loved her new father Silas and vice-versa. Because of this new daughter of his, Silas changed for the better. He became more caring and devoted to someone else besides himself. He started to go to church again and changed his views on what really was important in life. And one day when his treasure was found and returned to him, he didn't even care for it. He had something even more precious than gold: someone to love and receive love from.

Silas Marner became a bitter, lonely miser after he was accused of stealing church money. Declared guilty even though he wasn't, Marner lost his relationships with friends and loved ones. He moved away to a small town and secluded himself from any social activities or events. The people in this new town didn't bother him, but they thought he was strange and evil. Silas found his security in his gold which he stored up in his house. His treasure became his only companion. But when his gold was stolen one night, Silas thought he would die right then and there. He had no reason to live. Then one day, a little girl walked into his home and into his life. Her mother had died, leaving her as an orphan. So Silas adopted her and raised her in a poor hard-working sort of way. But, she loved him and he loved her. The treasure that Silas had lost had returned to him in a new form. He began to socialize with the people in his town, and no longer did they think he was weird or possessed. This girl brought about changes in Silas' life. He discovered that there are some things more precious than gold.

There are few great novels about people who are basically good and who are, in the end, rewarded for it. I can think of only three others I have read in this genre that had any literary merit: Eliot's ADAM BEDE; Elizabeth Gaskell's CRANFORD; and Oliver Goldsmith's THE VICAR OF WAKEFIELD. I can see why SILAS MARNER is usually regarded as a novel to be read by the young, if only because it reinforces values that most of us see as desirable.

Granted that Marner starts out as a miser, if only because he is so isolated from the rural community in which he lives. When Marner's small fortune is stolen, a strange thing happens: His neighbors gather closer to him and help him, drawing him out of himself and illuminating the goodness that was always inside of him. Marner's neighbor, Dolly Winthrop -- a poor, inarticulate wheelwight's wife who does everything she can to make Silas a part of the village of Raveloe -- particularly shines through in an excellent supporting role, one of many in the book.

When a toddler whose mother dies crawls into Marner's house, the process begins to accelerate as he adopts her. The weaver now has someone to live for; and the love between him and the little Eppie begins to flower.

Good seems such undynamic a quality in literature. George Eliot is one of the few writers who can make the tribulations of a good person worthwhile reading. In weaver and his neighbors, Eliot has created an entire community that strives for the greatest good (with the sole exception of Dunsey Cass, who steals Marner's fortune). The best books always make you wonder what happens next; and SILAS MARNER kept me turning the pages, marvelling at my own reactions to what I would once have thought was too simple and flimsy to engage my attention.

George Eliot is a writer of many surprises and many surprising strengths. I had approached this book only because I was filling in a gap in my reading. Having read it, I urge anyone to pick up this book if you are young and hope for the best in life -- or come to it, like myself, an adult who has been "nicked by the scythe," who has forgotten some simple truths about which he needed reminding.

Jim Moore and Wayne Slater watched closely for a long time to understand the deeply symbiotic relationship between the two most powerful men in the country. George W. Bush is the actor and Karl Rove is the director/screenwriter in this story of Texas and U.S. politics. Bush's Brain reveals how the two men interact, how Rove mapped out and executed a strategy to propel a Dallas businessman with a famous father and a deep political pedigree into the Governor's Mansion and into the White House.

The book details -- while laying open some long-simmering political stories and controversies -- the bag of tricks Rove assembled over the years in his ambition to be at the center of the political world. Bush isn't painted as a dummy, despite the book's title, but it's clear that neither of these men would live in Washington, DC, right now without the other's skills.

Some of the best stuff here is in the history; it catches the consultant honing the tools he used later in the presidential campaign, and that he's still using today. It catches Bush before his ambition for the top political job was apparent. And it does a nice job of pulling back the curtains on the political manuevering that takes place in campaigns in Texas and everywhere else. The writers covered both men for years as reporters in the Texas press corps and then on the presidential trail in 1999 and 2000, and it's clear they've done their homework. At a time when consultants are regularly canonized just because their guy won, Slater and Moore make a case for why it's important to know as much about the consultant as about the candidate.

All that and a great read, too!

I had a hard time believing that George W. was just a sock-puppet on Rove's hand. And this book confirmed that I was right. It definitely gives you an understanding of the relationship between Rove and W. and why some people believe W. is a creation...and others simply believe he is his own man and was just well-promoted. Everything in here makes you think. I have to recommend it...whether you love W. or hate him...the book helps explain him. Kudos to Moore and Slater for a well-written, well-supported piece of work. I love biographies and this is a good explanation of a couple men's lives. The only thing I've read lately that I like better is "Angry Chair" about a rock star who got wrapped up in heroin and isolation, then died last year.

I am a political consultant who has worked in Texas for almost a decade, roughly the same period chronicled in this terrific book, and I am surprised on many fronts. One, there's a lot of stuff in this book that I knew that I can't believe they got people to talk about. Two, there's stuff in this book that I never knew. And three, there's some very sad stories about the lives that Karl Rove has ruined in his single-minded rise to the top of the heap. It's like Robert Caro stopped being repetitive and wrote this book.

The unusual part of this book, for me, was the Selection 73, "Jaspers on his Illness." (pp. 528-535). The surprising ending to the selection is:

The description of my illness must not give a wrong impression. I am not forgetting that all my suffering was truly alleviated. All the complaining and desperate phrases that I have reported here must be understood against the background of the fundamental situation: the certainty of being loved and of love itself. (pp. 534-5).

Jaspers was born in 1883, so the diary entries from 1903 and 1904 were his state of mind at the age of 20, and even later, he must have still been feeling like an invalid for the entry of February 15, 1907, when he was at least 24 and wrote "The future confronts me like a mountain which I cannot climb over." (p. 533). The greatest thing about his condition was, "I could do no military service." (p. 534). Being isolated from that might have actually helped him reach the aforesaid conclusion.

I like basketball. I think Karl can coach. I don't think he wrote a good book. Maybe the problem is his agent or the publisher, because there isn't enough substance here to fill a pamphlet let alone a book written by a pro coach with "insights" into the game. The book is principally a look back on George's most successful seasons with the Sonics (he now coaches the Bucks). As for his questioning the "screwing around" with the game, his questioning doesn't kick in until the book is nearly over and the "questioning" is broad and nearly worthless. I was expecting some opinionated material as to the state of the game, its marketing, the officiating (spelled: no travelling calls, no palming calls, no 3 second calls and the blatant protection by the refs of such stars as Jordan and Shaq). Again, I suspect some marketing exec or George's personal agent suggested this book. George should have ignored them. If you can't tell it like it is while you're in the game, then wait until you're out of the game and then let 'er rip. George's book belongs at the far end of the bench.

George Karl as a coach in the NBA has a great deal of influence on the careers of any young man the he deals with. It is really too bad that he chooses to be creative when he decides to pass along information about one of them. One paticular incident in the book is about my son and me. His recollection of this incident is so far from what actually happened that I had to read it several times to believe what was written. It is just too bad that a man of this stature decides to be so petty.