I just can't seem to figure out the right angle (3rd base extended or 1st base extended) for a play at the plate. I use to always go 1st base extended, but felt like a lot of the plays were coming in at a way that the catchers body would block my view of the tag.

So I switched to 3rd base extended, and BOOM! there is the catcher blocking the plate up the line and I am again blocked by him.

What is the rule of thumb on which side to use? Does it have to do with the direction of the ball coming in? Please help!

On a passed ball we usually have little choice. We must move to the side that will not interfere with the catcher's throw.

But when a choice is available, I prefer third baseline extended. I feel it is more important that we set ourselves up where the <b>runner's</b> body cannot block a tag. If we do this, it is easier to adjust to the catcher should something strange happen.

There's no reason to stand like a statue. It's okay to take a step or two towards the play, or to the left or right, to get your nose right down in there. Plays at the plate can happen at a variety of different angles. If we stand still there is a greater risk of being blocked.

So since we know we might have to move to avoid being blocked out, I find it easier to concern myself with only one element in the play - the catcher. Third baseline extended offers me that luxury. It will be quite rare that the runner's body will block me out, so all I have to worry about is the catcher blocking me out. That makes an adjustment move far simpler to figure out in a split second than if I had worry about <b>both</b> the runner <b>and</b> the catcher blocking me.

There's no magic answer. Get yourself in a position to see the play. Adjust if you need to.

Another option for plays at the plate would be to initially line up at point of plate extended (2nd base ext.).

Read the play, specifically, path of the ball and position of F2. If you read a regular tag at the plate, move to 1st base ext. If you read the catcher setting up for a swipe tag, you can easily get to 3rd base ext.

The key for me is that I never pick a specific place to stand. Just like adjusting to see plays on the bases, we have to adjust to each specific play at the plateas it happens.

Dave Davies

My favorite position for a runner scoring was illustrated by Ed Montague in the first game of the World Series. He took the play in fair territory. He looked terrific, I thought!

I've been arguing for years that's the best spot (except for passed ball/wild pitch/infield grounder) for any runner scoring on a base hit.

Second choice: I'll stick with Brinkman here and go first-base line extended. For about 100 years that was the standard. Then someone thought up the "dangerous" third-base line and amateur umpires have been getting run over ever since. (I find it difficult to argue against Jim Porter, but in this instance, I must.)

First-base line is better simply because most runners (in my experience) swing <b>away</b> from the infield since that's the farthest away from the throw and hence requires the most dexterity from the catcher. Since the runner is sliding toward you, you have a pretty good shot at not getting blocked. The problem you face is the runner may still swing his legs into you if you're not careful.

OTOH: If you begin inside, you can <b>follow</b> the runner, looking for the tag, with <b>no</b> chance of getting hit, either by the fielders or a misplayed throw. You simply let the throw turn you into the play and then move as you need to since all the action is in front of and moving away from you.

Piece of cake, as Montague demonstrated for us all.

3RD BASE EXTENDED/2ND A BACKUP
 

I THINK THAT SECOND BASE EXT. IS A BACKUP POSITION FOR SEEING WHAT HAPPENS AT HOME PLATE.

3RD BASE EXT. IS THE IDEAL SPOT. ALOT OF PEOPLE SAY THAT THE CATCHER BLOCKS THE PLATE AND THAT IS A PROBLEM. I THINK THAT WOULD (AND DOES) MAKE IT MORE EASIER FOR US AS UMPIRES. NOW WE ARE ABLE TO SEE IF THE RUNNER CAN GET THROUGH TO THE PLATE.

I AGREE. NOTHING SAYS WE HAVE TO BE STATUES. WE NEED TO MOVE TO GET INTO GOOD POSITION. SO MOVE!

I HAVE HAD THE PRIV. OF WORKING H.S./AM. LEGION/CONNIE MAC/THE GREAT LAKES COLLEGIATE SUMMER/AND COLLEGE SPRING GAMES. THREE SUMMERS AGO I BEGAN UMPIRING INDEPENDENT MINOR LEAGUE BALL. WOW!!!!

I HAVE HAD SOME WILD BANGERS AT THE PLATE. 3RD BASE EXT. WAS THE ONLY PLACE TO SEE, AND MOVING UP TO THE PLATE AS THE PLAY DEVELOPED REALLY HELPS IN SEEING THE WHOLE PLAY AND GETTING THE CALL RIGHT. IF YOU ARE PAYING ATTENTION YOU WILL NOT GET RUN OVER AND CAN ALWAYS SIDE STEP THAT RUNNER THAT IS NOT GOING TO SLIDE.

As soon as you think you know it all, a new play happens at the plate that proves you wrong. The rule on plays at the plate is that there is no hard and fast rule. The biggest single common position mistake on plays at the plate is distance. Most of this discussion seems to center around angle.

1. Go straight back to the point of plate.

Dave Davies has most of this right. He says PU goes back to the point of the plate. He never gave any distances so I will. As a play develops PU backs up to the grass line at the point of the plate to watch the play develop. I have seen even "experienced" umpires not back up. They stay close and never recover as the play finally explodes on them.

2. Observe the play develop. Begin to make small adjustments. Key on the flight of the ball thrown toward the plate. Key also on the position of the catcher. The catcher will take you to the play. Stay about 12 feet from the catcher. If you get any closer you risk being in the way and losing the field of vision necessary to see the whole play.

3. Dave has the two primary options right.

IF the ball is beating the runner, usually the catcher will have the ball waiting to apply the tag. When the catcher has time he will block the plate and the runner will be forced to run directly toward the catcher. The first base line extended is best here. Do not get closer than 12 to 14 feet from the tag. In this position you will most often see the gap close between the runner and catcher. This will usually be a very easy call. If PU is on the 3B line extended he will see the number on the back of the catcher. X-Ray vision will often be required to see a tag from 3B line extended.

IF the ball is not beating the runner, the catcher is at the mercy of the throw. On this play the umpire must key the throw and try to keep the runner and catcher in view. Since the catcher has no time to catch the ball and set up, the umpire will be positioning himself for a sweep tag. The way this play usually develops is for the runner to be running wide, outside of the baseline, so that if the catcher gets the ball in time, the catcher will have to swing the tag back toward the runner as the runner tries to get around the catcher. In this case, if the umpire is on the 1st base line extended, he will often not see the tag because the runner's body will be screening the catcher and the tag. Davies is in good position for this one also. He went 3B line extended and will be focusing on the area between the runner and the catcher as the runner tries to run wide to avoid the tag. Do not get too close. The runner is not trained or motivated to avoid hitting the PU.

Be careful to keep a good distance. If you get your nose right down in there, as Porter suggests, you will be too close. Remember the runner and catcher are both moving. Our field of vision will narrow the closer we get. A wild play is easily missed if you are closer than 10 feet.

Review the basics on this one. The umpire must make adjustments as the play develops. He must constantly fight for optimal angle and distance. The best angle will be the position that allows him to see the space between the catcher and the runner. The two main types of plays require very different positions to achieve that perfect angle. The wrong position will cause the runner or the catcher to screen the PU view of the tag.

If this play is read correctly and executed correctly by PU the odds favor the umpire. There are many exceptions to this general mechanic but few that can be anticipated. This mechanic is complicated and involves some risk, but if understood and practiced correctly, give us our best odds.

Ranger,

I can agree in theory with just about everything you said, except one.

"<i>Be careful to keep a good distance. If you get your nose right down in there, as Porter suggests, you will be too close.</i>"

With force plays, distance is the key. 15 feet is not unheard of for a force play. Sometimes even more distance is needed.

But tag plays require the umpire to be closer. Ten feet, as far as I'm concerned, is about as far away as you want to be for a tag play.

I'm reminded of a play at second base that occurred during the World Series this year. The details escape me (I believe it was Posada trying to pick-off a runner who was off second a bit too far.) But basically U2 would have been blocked out if he hadn't have "put his nose right down in there." He had to adjust, move around the play, and then stick his nose in it to see that the runner was safe.

From the camera angle, I couldn't believe U2's call. From the crowd's reaction, no one could believe U2's call. But upon further replay review, U2 made the right call. It wasn't even all that close. And if he hadn't have adjusted and stuck his nose right in there, he wouldn't have gotten the call right.

Your post is excellent, however. We do disagree on distance relative to a tag play. Now I'm not suggesting we be <b>in the middle</b> of the play. I am saying that, when a tag occurs, we'd better see it.

Re: 3rd base extended/2nd a backup
 

Ron:

It's not necessary to shout. Take a look around. <b>Everybody</b> here types in lower case.

Good thread alot of good points made... here is my addition to help answer this.

There is a book that is sold various locations and sites... its the UDC for Minor League Pro Umps, 2 man mechanics that answers this question perfectly. Gives all examples and offers plenty of plays to show positioning at plate.

Good Luck

Ax

Based on the level of expertise of those who post here, I suspect the average umpire reading this thread is familiar with or owns the manual producted by the PBUC. I agree generally with your comment; by and large, those mechanics serve amateurs well.

Some caveats need to be made clear.

First, those mechanics were primarily created (and are required) for evaluation purposes. That is, a minor league evaluator in rating candidate umpires will expect the umpires to follow the guideliness, regardless of any exigent circumstances. He's looking for willingness to comply with directives and understanding of the "approved" system.

Second, many local associations, run by trained, competent clinicians, adopt their own set of guidelines. Umpires should not necessarily adopt PBUC mechanics until so instructed by their association.

Finally, in the absence of rigid requirements by a local group, umpires who are free to chose their own positions should gather as much data as they can. That has been the focus, anyway, of this thread.

Thank you for your reply to the thread Carl. As you suggested an umpire needs to evaluate as much information as possible. You pointed this out and glad you could agree on this.

Thats why I offered another source, the 2Man Mechinic Book that is usded by the Pro's. Just yet *another* source to reference.

By the way *I* think its well worth the 12-16 dollar investment. Its a great resource manual to refer to, adopt into your Assoc as well it *is* used in many of the clinic's and camps that offer 2 man mechanics.

Im sure some modifications or alternative changes have been made by local Assoc's and clinics.... but again a great reference to have. Goes into great detail and has lots of graphics to help show the points being made.

Ax

Ax:

I think you missed someting here. The "2 Man Mechanic" book you refer to is the same book Carl referred to as "the manual produced by the PBUC". And he is right in that most umpires at the level of this debate either do, or should have it already.

To Jim Porter about distance.

I make it my job to be an expert on what is taught at the professional umpire schools. I am also very aware that (as Carl indicated) they don't always have the best solutions. This is a case that I might say to you: Okay, but I will stay away from that play unless you can convince me that I am wrong. I must warn you that although I am not as old as Carl, I have a lot of years of bad positioning habit to break.

Consider this. Most of the college players are tall. Many are well over 6 feet. They will be running at the rate of better than 15 feet per second as they approach the plate. The ball is moving and the catcher (usually a 6 footer) will also be moving. Sometimes the throw will be very high or very wide. The area that you need to be focusing on is quite large. The tag will be happening in a small part of that area. But where?

If you don't need to see clearly this whole play as it develops then you might be good enough to put your nose down in the area that you predict the tag will occur. If you do and the play develops as you predict - BRAVO.

But what about the high throw? What about the runner who may decide to illegally or maliciously hit the catcher? How far will the tag be made from home plate? Suppose the runner will be tagged on his head one foot from the plate that he is about to touch with his right foot 7 feet away? How will you be able to catch a rolling slide with contact that happens over a 10 foot path as a tag may be applied in that mess? What if a punch or elbow is thrown at the runner? What if the runner actully slides into the umpire that is too close?

My umpire group has a few aliens with extraordinary visual skills. The Martians have antenna and a huge field of vision. They get real close. I happen to be a human being with 20-20 vision. I am not that good. I feel that the area that needs to be seen well on this kind of play is at least 15 feet. I know that I have to be far enough away from the play to have the entire play in my field of vision. To satisfy our human limitations I need to be about 20 feet away. Unfortunatly, if I stand that far away I may not be close enough to get the detail I may need. I also know that after I make a few calls from 20 feet away I may not be credible to the coaches and players. So I compromise.

Check yourself out. How wide is your field of vision? I am convinced that some plays can explode on you when you are too close. You may want to get this close but I hope you are not teaching others the same. If you have this wonderful gift you need to realize most of the rest of us do not. Speed, distance, detail, angle, and field of vision are all critical on any tag play. I simply want to see it all. I know my human limitations.

His(with a space)Holiness,

thank you for your reply.... I didnt miss what Carl said at all. In fact I thought I said I was glad he agreed about umpires and gathering as much info as possible!

In fact if you would read and absorb the Board posts and get enlightenment instead of trying to be the great interpurtor and defender of all replies you might not be so petty in your replies and save some ink space in the threads

Ta-ta
(had to use a spaced salutation as you have one in your name)

Ax

Re: Re: 3rd base extended/2nd a backup
 

Carl, Sorry for the screaming. I work at a radio station and we work with CAPS ALL THE TIME. DON'T EVER TAKE OFFENSE TO THE LARGE CAPS...I'M NEVER SCREAMING...NOTHING TO SCREAM ABOUT. TAKES A LITTLE STEP OUT OF BEGINNING AND ENDING A SENTENCE AND ALLOWS QUICKER TYPING TO A CERTAIN POINT...
SORRY IF YOU ARE OFFENDED.
I will try to remember, but no promises. :)

[
QUOTE]Originally posted by Carl Childress

Quote:

Originally posted by ronb21 I THINK THAT SECOND BASE EXT. IS A BACKUP POSITION FOR SEEING WHAT HAPPENS AT HOME PLATE. 3RD BASE EXT. IS THE IDEAL SPOT.

Ron:

It's not necessary to shout. Take a look around. <b>Everybody</b> here types in lower case. [/QUOTE]

Ranger,

Again, I don't disagree with you. In fact, you seem to have a better grasp on this area, which is, admittedly, one of my weakest.

I did not explain myself very well in this thread, which is quite unlike me, as you'll find out. I'm usually quite thorough.

When I say, "Get your nose down in there," I'm talking about our post-read reactions. Of course we need to start further away and read the play. That's a given on every play.

Amateur umpires have a tendency to be too far away from a tag play, and they tend to be flat footed. I've seen far more tag plays missed because an umpire stood still, far away from the play, than missed because the umpire was too close. In my opinion, a play "exploding on you" at close range is far less likely at the amateur level. Perhaps at professional umpire schools, and NCAA 1, where much finer points can be dissected, being too close is more of an issue. But in the trenches of youth ball, where the majority of umpires in this world are, that's hardly a problem.

After reading a tag play, if you're not ten to twelve feet from it, you risk missing it. If you don't adjust and, at the time of the tag, get your nose down in there, you risk missing it. Now I may not be an NCAA DI umpire, but I do work a lotta adult ball. I find these principles to be just as true there.

You say that you hope I am not teaching others the same. Let's not delve into insulting one another's training methods or beliefs. There's no need for that. The umpires under my training have done a superior job. I have watched umpires that I have trained go on to work HS, NCAA, and even semi-pro. They didn't seem to be too damaged by the experience.

I'll be honest with you.

I'm not upset. I just don't want discussions to degrade between us.

I have a hard time believing you when I have no idea who you are. I have a hard time putting credence to your ideas and methods without knowing who you are. And I'm not alone, I'm quite sure about that.

When Carl Childress speaks, it's quite easy to listen to him. I know who he is and I know his experience. I know well enough to dummy up and go into listening mode.

When Jon Bible speaks, it's quite easy to listen to him. I know who he is and I know his experience. I know well enough to dummy and go into listening mode.

When Ranger speaks, I think, "Who is this guy? Is this just another anonymous poster pulling our chains?"

You must understand that our chains have been pulled too many times on the Internet. I am cautious now. I will always be cautious. And until I know who you are, you have very little credibility. That's not your fault. That's just the way it is.

It would be beneficial to you and the umpires on this forum if you would identify yourself. You are not an NCAA umpire travelling all over the country teaching umpires unless we know who you are. You must admit, any Joe off the street can claim to be something he's not. I'm afraid that's how I have to view you until I know otherwise.

Sometimes you sound like a learned umpire with great experience. Other times your words and sentence structures sound all too familiar. This is a problem that will haunt you on this forum until you make the decision to stand behind your identity, and your experience. Until then, thanks for your thoughts.

Jim:

I share you opinion here. As anyone on the Internet knows, enemies of other officials abound. We had one of those "attack" posts here. That official has continued his attacks elsewhere even though neither you nor I ever respond to his posts.

We are not a secret society. Jon Bible, Dave Yeast, Scott Ehret, Ken Allen, Steve Mattingly, Sal Giaco, Carl Childress: Those are all D1 or professional/former professional umpires who post to the Net. None hides behind a pseudonym; none fails to offer his ISP email address. (There are no "hotmail" accounts among that group.) Those men -- and I -- stand up for their thoughts. Their resumes are open books; their opinions are "authoritative." I don't always agree with Jon nor he with me. But we have far more in common than not, and each of us respects the other's expertise.

Ranger: You could be Tony Thompson. He would have observed umpires in eight states this past season. You could be John Brown, with access to a professional clinician's manual augmented by a bare-bones knowledge of baseball.

HisHoliness? God himself? PLEASE...

As I have said in other threads, in all clinics and camps I am involved with as an instructor, I stress that whatever mechanics you are presented with, from whatever source, they should be taken as GUIDELINES, and not as rules set in stone. Find something mechanically that works for you, and then work it to death! The more things we can do mechanically that we don't have to think about, the better we will be able to focus on the play and the call. That's why we don't get "good" at balls and strikes until we've looked at a few hundred thousand! That's why we also stress getting instruction and suggestions and critiques from as many sources as you can in an ongoing umping career. Something you don't know may be a better way fpr you!

Golly Jim. Your second line says that you do not want discussions to degrade between us. Then you last paragraph sonds like the last line in a Dear John letter. I have no idea what to make of this.

If not degrading was your mission, I hope I never see your bad side. You don't need to "believe" me. You don't need to put "credence" to my ideas. If I have pulled your "chain" show me where, and I will punish myself. Just how the heck am I supposed to know about this chain pulling you are so paranoid about? Show me anything I have said that is so flawed that my credibility should be questioned. Even in your last paragraph you said that I sound learned but there is something (I don't know what!) wrong with my writing style. Why can't I just be me?

This is amazing and uncivil. I am totally new here. This is the first month I have posted on this board, or any other, and I am nothing without a pedigree and registration number. Sadly, it seems that I have committed the cardinal sin of offering some good mechanics advice to a guy named Jim Porter. Are you only able to give advice? You may be an expert on baseball but you most certainly are not the right person to ride the welcome wagon. You have made me feel bad.

So now you want me to give you a bunch of personal information or I am a nobody?

Jim, I said I was sorry in my last post. I have wanted to talk about baseball but you want to talk about personal stuff. I can hardly believe that I am apologizing again. I am sorry. I really did not know these rules.

From now on I will be a nobody. I will stay in formation like a good soldier. I will not speak of my years in the game or my experience as an umpire. I will not expect you and your friends to respond to anything I say. Will that plaese you?

My post was intended to make you aware that there have been problems in the past with posters who "pose" as so-called D1 umpires under anonymous pseudonyms. I didn't claim you did anything wrong. There's nothing uncivil about informing you of problems.

Your response leaves me a little confused.

I did not insult you, or make you feel unwelcome. I told you that we have had problems in the past with anonymous posters posing as D1 umpires. That's not your fault, as I pointed out. But it is a problem.

I would love it if you could be another authoritative source on the Internet. The more the merrier. My wish is that you will privately e-mail Mr. Childress or myself, where we will keep your identity a secret, and respect the privacy of your information. This is not, in my opinion, an unreasonable request. Especially considering the problems of anonymous posters posing as D1 umpires when they aren't.

There's nothing personal about this. I'm sorry if it makes you feel so upset. I meant it when I said, "thank you for your thoughts." I wasn't being sarcastic, as you apparently took it. I learned from you. I agreed with you when I felt you were right.

It is unfortunate that a few people have spoiled Internet message boards for umpires with their shenanigans. It is unfortunate that we must be suspect of any anonymous poster claiming to be a high-ranking college umpire. It is unfortunate that you must bear the responsibility of e-mailing someone privately just to prove who you are. But there have been so many problems that it is necessary. Otherwise you will not be taken seriously. And I <b>want</b> to take you seriously. Others in this forum <b>want</b> to take you seriously. We <b>want</b> you to really be a D1 umpire.

We're not asking for a pedigree. All we're asking for is that you e-mail one of us privately, so we know you're not just another anonymous poster playing games. That's not an unreasonable request, unless you're playing games.

I wish you well. I want nothing but the best for you and this forum. I hope you will consider our request.

Carl,

Why do you and Jim want to talk about "attacks" with me? That is clearly not me. I do not understand and it doesn't even seem relevant. Did I say anything about a secret society?

Is this a umpire forum or not? I have consistently wanted to talk about umpiring and you guys only seem to want to pry personal information from people. If I make a post about mechanics and you want to zero in on one small statement that I made about me observing umpires you are missing the point. If I am wrong about anything substantive you can disagree. If I think this board is encouraging umpires to get their nose right down on a tag play at home I should at least mention it. You should mention it! I should not fear reprisals that belittle me because I have not given you my name.

Please stop being distracted by who I am. It is totally unimportant. Please forget anything I ever said about who I am and what I do. I am a nothing to you. At this point in time you need to trust and have some faith.

When Jim made that statement likening you to a hornets nest I thought it was a joke.

I am not your enemy. Please keep the hornets in the nest.

CM,

I agree with you. <b>Except</b> when it's evaluation time. If we have the luxury of loosening the mechanics guidelines, then great! Otherwise, we'd better stick to the book else our ratings will drop.

I don't know about you, but I want those post-season assignments. In order to get them, when <b>my</b> evaluators are concerned, I need to do what <b>they</b> expect me to do. I suppose I wish I was lucky enough to have evaluators who would let me loosen the guidelines a bit. But I don't.

There is one board that I know of whose members police themselves. They rate their partners. That's another example of when we should stick as close to the book as possible. I don't want my partner turning me in because I moved to deep "B" with the bases loaded and the infield in.

Anyhow, you're right for the most part. But we need to be careful. There are some dictators out there who require us to do what they want, and not necessarily what works best for us. And until we play their game and eventually move up to where we're calling the shots, those guys hold our futures in the pen that writes on the evaluation sheet.

I'm not sure what you mean, Ranger. I didn't talk about attacks at all. I didn't mention anything about a hornet's nest.

I'm just trying to get you to understand that too many people have posed as D1 umpires and tried to play games with us. Unfortunately, without knowing your identity, you fall into that category. You will be viewed as an anonymous poster here to do nothing but play games with us. I'm not trying to insult you or hurt you, and I didn't make it this way. Others have spoiled the fun for you, not me.

Because of the two year's worth of games with anonymous posters, I can't get over this identity problem with you. I just can't. I'm sorry.

When welfare began, people used it legitimately. After years of abuse, people lost out. The rules changed to keep the abuse from happening. That's a good analogy to what you're experiencing.

When unemployment insurance began, no one abused that system. But after years of abuse, the rules changed and everyone lost out. That's another good analogy to what you're experiencing.

Too many people abused the privilege of anonymous posting on these boards. I'm afraid that means we have to view your presence here as suspect. I'm sorry for that, but it's not my doing.

Just e-mail one of us. It won't hurt and we will keep your identity secret and we will honor your privacy. The posters here will take our word for it if we say you are legitimate. We're trying to <b>help you</b>, not hurt you.

Fine Jim, I emailed you. I no longer wish to be pushed by you guys in public. Use email.

I never asked to get involved with your personal problems about unpleasant posters in your past. I still think that you are dreaming this up to lay at my feet. I have searched this whole board and I can not find the evil that you are trying so hard to protect yourself from. You may be right. It may actually exist. It would help me understand if I saw some examples. Your zealousness on this subject is very uncomfortable.

The answer is simple. WHY DON'T YOU SIMPLY REQUIRE EVERYBODY TO REGISTER THEIR NAME AND EMAIL?

You were right about the hornets nest analogy. That was another guy that warned me. I was confused. Sorry.

From now on I don't want to talk about my personal life or your hang ups about the evil anonymous posters out there. If you and all your friends want to out me, ignore me, or not believe me, that is your right. In the meantime I will be here to talk baseball and sports officiating. Perhaps one day you will be able to read a post from me and be more charitable. I am sure you realize life is too short.

I will be your friend no matter how you treat me.

This has to be called out
 

This is getting so tired. Persons above posting with their (given? who really knows) names do so according to their choice. WHO cares?

Persons like BJ Moose, His Holiness (the real one, not the fake wussy man here), and most others have chosen a name because they can. Who cares again?

I consider any handle to represent a real and legit person if it is associated with an EMAIL that I can reach, and if they establish some longevity.

Of course, MOST of the morons and flamers/stalkers on McGriff are idiots. We know ANYONE can post there under any name, this kills credibility in most cases.

But for crying out loud, a real umpire CAN participate in these forums as.. JOE Q. BLOW, and is entitled to the same courtesy and respect as QUINCY R. REALNAME is.

I AM NOT HIDING.. anyone want to email me.... click the freakin button. LOOK AT MY PROFILE, I'm not making this stuff up.

Now, I agree.. Hotmail blows... but to allude that I have less credibility because my email is @yahoo.com is idiotic. My ISP sucks... Yahoo mail works fantastic, is very fast, and I can segregate my UMP stuff from biz and personal. Sheesh......

<B>Please abide by the forum guidlines</B>

If you choose not to abide by the forum guidelines you will be given a fair chance, but will then be deleted.

<B>[HisHoliness Deleted]</B>

I am closing this thread as it is getting off-topic.