Announcement

Collapse

Updated Baseball Fever Policy

Baseball Fever Policy

I. Purpose of this announcement:

This announcement describes the policies pertaining to the operation of Baseball Fever.

Baseball Fever is a moderated baseball message board which encourages and facilitates research and information exchange among fans of our national pastime. The intent of the Baseball Fever Policy is to ensure that Baseball Fever remains an extremely high quality, extremely low "noise" environment.

Baseball Fever is administrated by three principal administrators:
webmaster - Baseball Fever Owner
The Commissioner - Baseball Fever Administrator
Macker - Baseball Fever Administrator

And a group of forum specific super moderators. The role of the moderator is to keep Baseball Fever smoothly and to screen posts for compliance with our policy. The moderators are ALL volunteer positions, so please be patient and understanding of any delays you might experience in correspondence.

II. Comments about our policy:

Any suggestions on this policy may be made directly to the webmaster.

III. Acknowledgments:

This document was based on a similar policy used by SABR.

IV. Requirements for participation on Baseball Fever:

Participation on Baseball Fever is available to all baseball fans with a valid email address, as verified by the forum's automated system, which then in turn creates a single validated account. Multiple accounts by a single user are prohibited.

By registering, you agree to adhere to the policies outlined in this document and to conduct yourself accordingly. Abuse of the forum, by repeated failure to abide by these policies, will result in your access being blocked to the forum entirely.

V. Baseball Fever Netiquette:

Participants at Baseball Fever are required to adhere to these principles, which are outlined in this section.
a. All posts to Baseball Fever should be written in clear, concise English, with proper grammar and accurate spelling. The use of abbreviations should be kept to a minimum; when abbreviation is necessary, they should be either well-known (such as etc.), or explained on their first use in your post.

b. Conciseness is a key attribute of a good post.

c. Quote only the portion of a post to which you are responding.

d. Standard capitalization and punctuation make a large difference in the readability of a post. TYPING IN ALL CAPITALS is considered to be "shouting"; it is a good practice to limit use of all capitals to words which you wish to emphasize.

e. It is our policy NOT to transmit any defamatory or illegal materials.

f. Personal attacks of any type against Baseball Fever readers will not be tolerated. In these instances the post will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the personal attack via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue personal attacks will be banned from the site.

g. It is important to remember that many contextual clues available in face-to-face discussion, such as tone of voice and facial expression, are lost in the electronic forum. As a poster, try to be alert for phrasing that might be misinterpreted by your audience to be offensive; as a reader, remember to give the benefit of the doubt and not to take umbrage too easily. There are many instances in which a particular choice of words or phrasing can come across as being a personal attack where none was intended.

h. The netiquette described above (a-g) often uses the term "posts", but applies equally to Private Messages.

VI. Baseball Fever User Signature Policy

A signature is a piece of text that some members may care to have inserted at the end of ALL of their posts, a little like the closing of a letter. You can set and / or change your signature by editing your profile in the UserCP. Since it is visible on ALL your posts, the following policy must be adhered to:

Signature Composition
Font size limit: No larger than size 2 (This policy is a size 2)
Style: Bold and italics are permissible
Character limit: No more than 500 total characters
Lines: No more than 4 lines
Colors: Most colors are permissible, but those which are hard to discern against the gray background (yellow, white, pale gray) should be avoided
Images/Graphics: Allowed, but nothing larger than 20k and Content rules must be followed

Signature Content
No advertising is permitted
Nothing political or religious
Nothing obscene, vulgar, defamatory or derogatory
Links to personal blogs/websites are permissible - with the webmaster's written consent
A Link to your Baseball Fever Blog does not require written consent and is recommended
Quotes must be attributed. Non-baseball quotes are permissible as long as they are not religious or political

Please adhere to these rules when you create your signature. Failure to do so will result in a request to comply by a moderator. If you do not comply within a reasonable amount of time, the signature will be removed and / or edited by an Administrator. Baseball Fever reserves the right to edit and / or remove any or all of your signature line at any time without contacting the account holder.

VII. Appropriate and inappropriate topics for Baseball Fever:

Most concisely, the test for whether a post is appropriate for Baseball Fever is: "Does this message discuss our national pastime in an interesting manner?" This post can be direct or indirect: posing a question, asking for assistance, providing raw data or citations, or discussing and constructively critiquing existing posts. In general, a broad interpretation of "baseball related" is used.

Baseball Fever is not a promotional environment. Advertising of products, web sites, etc., whether for profit or not-for-profit, is not permitted. At the webmaster's discretion, brief one-time announcements for products or services of legitimate baseball interest and usefulness may be allowed. If advertising is posted to the site it will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the post via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue advertising will be banned from the site. If the advertising is spam-related, pornography-based, or a "visit-my-site" type post / private message, no warning at all will be provided, and the member will be banned immediately without a warning.

It is considered appropriate to post a URL to a page which specifically and directly answers a question posted on the list (for example, it would be permissible to post a link to a page containing home-road splits, even on a site which has advertising or other commercial content; however, it would not be appropriate to post the URL of the main page of the site). The site reserves the right to limit the frequency of such announcements by any individual or group.

In keeping with our test for a proper topic, posting to Baseball Fever should be treated as if you truly do care. This includes posting information that is, to the best of your knowledge, complete and accurate at the time you post. Any errors or ambiguities you catch later should be acknowledged and corrected in the thread, since Baseball Fever is sometimes considered to be a valuable reference for research information.

VIII. Role of the moderator:

When a post is submitted to Baseball Fever, it is forwarded by the server automatically and seen immediately. The moderator may:
a. Leave the thread exactly like it was submitted. This is the case 95% of the time.

b. Immediately delete the thread as inappropriate for Baseball Fever. Examples include advertising, personal attacks, or spam. This is the case 1% of the time.

c. Move the thread. If a member makes a post about the Marlins in the Yankees forum it will be moved to the appropriate forum. This is the case 3% of the time.

d. Edit the message due to an inappropriate item. This is the case 1% of the time. There have been new users who will make a wonderful post, then add to their signature line (where your name / handle appears) a tagline that is a pure advertisement. This tagline will be removed, a note will be left in the message so he/she is aware of the edit, and personal contact will be made to the poster telling them what has been edited and what actions need to be taken to prevent further edits.

The moderators perform no checks on posts to verify factual or logical accuracy. While he/she may point out gross errors in factual data in replies to the thread, the moderator does not act as an "accuracy" editor. Also moderation is not a vehicle for censorship of individuals and/or opinions, and the moderator's decisions should not be taken personally.

IX. Legal aspects of participation in Baseball Fever:

By submitting a post to Baseball Fever, you grant Baseball Fever permission to distribute your message to the forum. Other rights pertaining to the post remain with the ORIGINAL author, and you may not redistribute or retransmit any posts by any others, in whole or in part, without the express consent of the original author.

The messages appearing on Baseball Fever contain the opinions and views of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of Baseball Fever, or of the Baseball Almanac family of sites.

Sincerely,

Sean Holtz, Webmaster of Baseball Almanac & Baseball Fever
www.baseball-almanac.com | www.baseball-fever.com
"Baseball Almanac: Sharing Baseball. Sharing History."
See more
See less

Gibson/Piazza

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Captain Cold Nose
    One man's biased opinion should never be taken as gospel.
    Satchel Paige faced Ted Williams and Joe Dimaggio and still said that about Gibson, that counts for something

    Comment


    • #32
      [QUOTE=blackout805]
      I did see some stats a while back and saved them, I will search for them and post them. It was the batting averages of some who played in black baseball compared to how some did in white integrated minor league baseball and also compared to how they did in MLB.

      While these stas may have some flaws I think it's appearant that it shows that MLB and even minor league baseball had "over all" pitching that was on a higher level than black baseball.

      The flaws in those comparison..... the number of at bats that those blacks had in black baseball were much higher than they were in minor and MLB.

      Another flaw, that some of them were older when they finally got to play in minor and MLB. Some were not that much older when they did play integrated minor and MLB. Some names Junior Gilliam, Sam Jethro, Jackie Robinson, Willie Mays and Elston Howard.

      Going on memory the a high percentage of the blacks on that list ( around 20 hitters) if my memory serves me right.. most of the blacks hit for lower averages in MLB and even in minor league baseball.

      The difference was significant, most hit for maybe 15 points lower in minor league baseball than they did in black baseball.

      The batting average difference in MLB, most hit for a combined batting average that was 20+ points lower in MLB than they hit in black baseball.

      Again that the way I recall it from memory, I will try to locate the actual figures and post them.

      That should always be considered when we bring up batting averages of blacks that were compiled in black baseball.

      Here is what I located, the difference between blacks batting averages was more than I stated above, I thought it was around 20 points but I was going on memory. These are the actual numbers. The total at bats and hits were computerized, calculated and this is what was projected, the batting average and average number of home runs based on a season of 550 at bats. These are the numbers and the comparison of some blacks, how they hit in black baseball compared to minor league baseball and how they hit in black baseball compared to integrated MLB

      -----------------------BA.------------Home runs
      Black baseball---------.336-------------12
      Minor Leagues---------.312-------------16



      --------------------Ba.-------------Home runs
      Black baseball------.332--------------13
      MLB----------------.281--------------18

      You can see they averaged more home runs but hit for a lower Ba. in the minors and MLB.

      There was a total of about 20 batters on that list. Some names, Jackie Robinson, junior Gilliam, Sandy Amoros, Roy Campanella, Sam Jetroe, Elston Howard, Monte Irvin, Minnie Minoso, Bob Boyd, Luke Easter, Willie Mays, Larry Doby and Ernie Banks.
      Last edited by SHOELESSJOE3; 01-12-2006, 08:51 PM.

      Comment


      • #33
        i don't think anyone is denying that josh gibson was indeed a great player but you just can't make up stats - if they are not available - they are not available - it's a shame but that is how it is - please don't make up numbers especially something like 900 homers (why was 900 selected? because of painfully researched data or because no one else has hit 900 homers?)

        if we just want to spit out numbers without any explanation attached to them then here is the greatest season in the history of the world (and these numbers are not made up) - In 1869 george wright scored 339 times with 49 home runs and a .629 batting average in a mere 57 games

        not to take anything away from the top-notch negro league teams but these contests against major league clubs are exhibitions - my understanding of exhibition is that major leaguers have always taken them less seriously than league play - they may play out of position - they play with men they've never met from the minors or such - they may add local talent to the club - on the sports/entertainment scale it slides towards entertainment - it was all post season - it was for extra cash - cash made easy - a good time - not the live and die of a pennant race

        another question: how many quotes have you ever read that said so-and-so was a terrible player? or a second rate player? or just a second tier player? - the wording people give in interviews is always glowing - that there is extremely biased and fails to represent a legitimate sample

        it's not going out on a limb to say that piazza faced better pitching day in and day out than anyone in the negro leagues - i personally have a lot of respect for negro league ball and enjoy reading about it - but i am also under no delusions - there were top-notch/great ballplayers in the negro leagues - some would have done okay in the majors some would have excelled - at no time though was the overall quality of play in the negro leagues of major league caliber - the game is all about pitching and mr. gibson just didn't consistently face the best pitching - and the shame of the story here is that he was barred from doing so because of something to do with pigmentation
        Last edited by Brian McKenna; 01-12-2006, 06:13 AM.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by blackout805
          Satchel Paige faced Ted Williams and Joe Dimaggio and still said that about Gibson, that counts for something
          It counts for a lot, but, it's still one man's opinion, and a biased one at that. It's like Tony Dungy saying Peyton Manning is the greatest player of all time.
          Uh-oh, shouldn't have stooped there.
          Last edited by Captain Cold Nose; 01-12-2006, 09:40 AM.
          Dave Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Dick Alex Sparky
          Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
          Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
          Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
          Robin Bill Ernie JEDI

          Comment


          • #35
            the problem with first hand accounts is that they are so overwhelmingly positive and they are usually in hindsight with the ex-player far removed from his competitive days that things get romanticized

            take for instance a parent talking about his/her adult child - if a reporter came in and talked about that child, the parent is going to remember good stories and events and speak glowingly of the child - later in the day that same parent remembers the same good points but talks with his/her spouse (someone who was actually there when the child was reared) - and now they prod each other's memory and realize that the child wasn't perfect nor were they themselves - they acknowledge the child's flaws and their own (though this may not even be spoken) - the end result is people convey what they want to convey when they want to convey it and under what circumstances - hence, we all have an agenda and we have to realize this

            this is the same in baseball - take any event from history - read how it is summarized today - now jump on proquest and examine the actual details - and i mean the fine details of the event and results - you may/probably draw different conclusions in response - and i bet (almost guarantee) that things didn't actually occur as they have been so often repeated since and consequently believed as gospel today

            i have been researching a specific individual through old accounts recently - we already have preconceived ideas about past events and have heard stories over and over again - i can tell you flat out that so many stories are either grossly fabricated, wholly inaccurate, slightly inaccurate or moderately inaccurate - people, places, circumstances, the actual event and results are often just dead off

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3
              Lets turn it around. We keep focusing as to how would Gibson do against MLB pitching. Try this one, what would Piazza do playing in negro leagues and hitting against black pitchers of long ago.

              There seems to be the perception that some posters are not giving black players who were not given their shot their due. Thats not the truth, only saying that over all black pitching was not on the level of MLB pitching.

              Not to say white pitchers were superior. The fact that there was no money in black baseball to keep the best, there was very little scouting to search for good black pitchers. Lets put aside emotions and deal with the facts, not nice but those are the facts.

              When we toss Gibson's numbers around consider the level of pitching he faced, some great ones but on a day to day basis not on the level of MLB.Imagine Piazza hit black pitching day to day.
              Actually, I think there were two major problems with Negro league pitching: 1) the short rosters (due to money concerns) meant you could only carry a few pitchers, and 2) they played 200 times a year. Granted, those 200 games included lesser teams, so they could coast, but they pitched an awful lot--which wasn't good for their arms. I'm sure that Negro league pitchers habitually coasted unless the game was on the line in order to keep that better paying job as a ballplayer as opposed to what jobs they would hold outside of baseball.

              Jim Albright
              Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
              Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
              A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by jalbright
                Actually, I think there were two major problems with Negro league pitching: 1) the short rosters (due to money concerns) meant you could only carry a few pitchers, and 2) they played 200 times a year. Granted, those 200 games included lesser teams, so they could coast, but they pitched an awful lot--which wasn't good for their arms. I'm sure that Negro league pitchers habitually coasted unless the game was on the line in order to keep that better paying job as a ballplayer as opposed to what jobs they would hold outside of baseball.

                Jim Albright
                i'm also sure that the best pitchers vastly outclassed many of the hitters they faced throughout the year (if a year even meant anything) - hence, they didn't have to give it their all in many exhibition games - just let the hitters win the game for them - my guess is also that they did get burned sometimes doing this but it was infrequent and probably was rectifiable most of the time

                if satch came to town possesing top-notch speed and control - well he probably was only concerned with one or two hitters on a particular team - he didn't need to go all out, all day

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Captain Cold Nose
                  It counts for a lot, but, it's still one man's opinion, and a biased one at that. It's like Tony Dungy saying Peyton Manning is the greatest player of all time.
                  Uh-oh, shouldn't have stooped there.
                  Because Satchel coached Gibson?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Bench 5
                    The definition of the "major league" teams often consisted of a a few legit major leaguers and the rest minor leaguers. The top Negro League teams were competitive with major leaguers but the overall depth of talent wasn't nearly as strong as the major leagues. In many of those barnstorming games, position players for the major leaguers would pitch.

                    I agree with you that Satchel Paige was without a doubt one of the top 5 pitchers of all time.

                    I would rate Gibson as better than Piazza but I take Johnny Bench over both of them.
                    " The definition of the "major league" teams often consisted of a a few legit major leaguers and the rest minor leaguers. The top Negro League teams were competitive with major leaguers but the overall depth of talent wasn't nearly as strong as the major leagues "

                    What proof do you have of this ?

                    " In many of those barnstorming games, position players for the major leaguers would pitch "

                    Again proof ?

                    I could say the same for the negroleagues, doesnt mean it's true.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3
                      Every opinion counts, no matter what other think, no matter who disagrees. I don't know whats in Satchel's mind but it's at least reasonable to believe that his opinion "could be' biassed, choosing to pick a hitter who played in his leagues when he rates Gibson as the greatest hitter.
                      " I did see some stats a while back and saved them, I will search for them and post them. It was the batting averages of some who played in black baseball compared to how some did in white integrated minor league baseball and also compared to how they did in MLB. "

                      Jackie robinson hit .390 and slugged well over .600 In the negroleagues, He never did that In the white Intergrated league, But he STILL was elite.

                      So considering the fact that gibson was most likely MUCH better than robinson, I'm willing to bet his stats in the white league would of been incredible.


                      But using that same biased logic your using to aid your arguement for the white league being superior, how do you know players such as ruth would of dominated the way he did had the league not been segregated ?

                      Is it a " coincidence " that Nobody ( besides bonds) has matched the raw stats of ruth, cobb, williams, wagner, and a few others since that segregated era ?

                      Do you really think that ruth would of done Mike Mussina Impersonations In today's league of different cultures from all over the world ?

                      Just something to think about...
                      Last edited by Bill Burgess; 01-12-2006, 02:42 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by bkmckenna
                        i don't think anyone is denying that josh gibson was indeed a great player but you just can't make up stats - if they are not available - they are not available - it's a shame but that is how it is - please don't make up numbers especially something like 900 homers (why was 900 selected? because of painfully researched data or because no one else has hit 900 homers?)
                        " don't think anyone is denying that josh gibson was indeed a great player but you just can't make up stats - if they are not available - they are not available - it's a shame but that is how it is - please don't make up numbers especially something like 900 homers (why was 900 selected? because of painfully researched data or because no one else has hit 900 homers?) "

                        The same could be said of babe ruth's pitching career. Granted, we do know what his raw stats were, But adjusting for era ( he pitched in the deadball era) they werent anything astromical, No better than the pitching numbers posted By Pat Hentgen.

                        Yet the casual fan, writer, Member of the media, etc, always falsely portrays ruth's pitching career as " Incredible ", and usually tends to use that arguement to aid his place in history.

                        " not going out on a limb to say that piazza faced better pitching day in and day out than anyone in the negro leagues - i personally have a lot of respect for negro league ball and enjoy reading about it - but i am also under no delusions - there were top-notch/great ballplayers in the negro leagues - some would have done okay in the majors some would have excelled - "

                        He probably did face better pitching than gibson.

                        He also faced better, stronger, more effective relief pitching than ruth or any player from that era.
                        Last edited by Bill Burgess; 01-12-2006, 02:42 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Dontworry
                          The same could be said of babe Ruth's pitching career. Granted, we do know what his raw stats were, But adjusting for era ( he pitched in the deadball era) they weren't anything astronomical, No better than the pitching numbers posted By Pat Hentgen.

                          Yet the casual fan, writer, Member of the media, etc, always falsely portrays Ruth's pitching career as " Incredible ", and usually tends to use that argument to aid his place in history.
                          are you saying Ruth wasn't astronomical when he was pitching? second to Walter Johnson, he was the best pitcher in baseball in his prime
                          Last edited by Bill Burgess; 01-12-2006, 03:29 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by blackout805
                            are you saying Ruth wasn't astronomical when he was pitching? second to Walter Johnson, he was the best pitcher in baseball in his prime
                            Babe Ruth was a very excellent pitcher, while he did that. He led his L. in ERA in 1916, but came in 7th in ERA next season, and so we can say that for that one year, he had the best year, among the competing pitchers.

                            I do NOT think it is fair or just to say the if you lead your L in ERA for a year, or even several other stats, than you are the best pitcher in BB, even for that year. Even when Babe led in ERA in 1916, Walter Johnson was still the best pitcher in BB, followed by Alexander.

                            We must be exceedingly careful as to our language in these matters. Words do count. Language matters.

                            Bill Burgess
                            Last edited by Bill Burgess; 01-12-2006, 03:37 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              someone on this board posted this once:

                              Ruth was a pitcher only in 1915-16-17 and here is how he compares in some stats, not only in the AL but in the NL as well, in all off baseball in 1915-16-17.

                              Base runners/9 innings pitched
                              1---Walter Johnson--------------9.08
                              2---Babe Ruth------------------10.13
                              3---Hooks Dauss----------------11.51

                              Batters faced
                              1---Walter Johnson-------------4038
                              2---Babe Ruth------------------3508
                              3---Hooks Dauss----------------3286

                              Hits/9 Inn.
                              1-- Babe Ruth-----------------6.64
                              2---Walter Johnson------------6.94
                              3---Hooks Dauss--------------7.96

                              Shutouts
                              1---Walter Johnson-----------18
                              2---Babe Ruth----------------16
                              3---Reb Russell---------------13

                              Strikeouts
                              1---Walter Johnson---------619
                              2---Babe Ruth--------------410
                              3---Dutch Leonard----------404

                              Strikeout/Walks
                              1---Walter Johnson--------3.00
                              2---Babe Ruth-------------1.32
                              3---Hooks Dauss-----------1.14

                              Walks
                              1---Joe Bush--------------330
                              2---Babe Ruth-------------311
                              3---Bill James--------------300

                              Walks/9 innings pitched
                              1---Walter Johnson-------1.80
                              2---Hooks Dauss----------3.18
                              3---Babe Ruth------------3.23

                              Strike outs
                              1---Walter Johnson-----619
                              2---Alexander----------608
                              3---Dave Davenport----458
                              4---Babe Ruth---------410

                              Walks
                              1---Babe Ruth---------311
                              2---Pete Schnieder----305
                              3---Davenport--------301

                              Wins
                              1---Alexander--------94
                              2---Walter Johnson--75
                              3--- Babe Ruth------65

                              Winning percentage
                              1---Alexander------.729
                              2---Ruth----------.663
                              3 ---Johnson------.605


                              forget who, but credit to them, not me

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by blackout805
                                someone on this board posted this once:

                                Ruth was a pitcher only in 1915-16-17 and here is how he compares in some stats, not only in the AL but in the NL as well, in all off baseball in 1915-16-17.

                                Base runners/9 innings pitched
                                1---Walter Johnson--------------9.08
                                2---Babe Ruth------------------10.13
                                3---Hooks Dauss----------------11.51
                                I posted those stats some weeks ago. I have always stated that there is no way to tell how Ruth would have done for a career had he remained on the mound. I have never said he was a great pitcher, he would have to prove that over the long haul.

                                But I will say and the numbers prove it, that he was one of the best in the only 3 seasons that he was a pitcher only. It's often brought up that he pitched in the dead ball era and had he remained a pitcher his ERA and some other stats would have suffered with the banning of trick deliveries, the practice of tossing out scuffed up balls and the livelier ball that came in the years 1920, actually that ball may have been improved, tighter wind in 1919.

                                I say to that, so what, all pitchers would have suffered with those changes, what does that have to do with how Ruth pitched before 1920. Didn't all pitchers pitch under the same conditions in the years 1915-16-17.

                                Lets face the facts, look at the only two pitchers that could be considered better than Ruth in the years 1915-16-17, Alexander and Johnson, two of the greatest ever and he was a lefty facing around 75 percent right handed batters

                                Only 3 left handers in the history of the game threw more shutouts in a season than Ruth's 9 shutouts in 1916, Sandy Koufax 11, Carl Hubbell and John Tudor.

                                They can say what they like, that Ruth could not be considered great, he was only a full time pitcher for 3 full seasons. They can't say he would not have been great, I can't say he would have. I can say and it can be proven he was amongst the best in the seasons of 1915-16-17.
                                Last edited by Bill Burgess; 01-24-2006, 08:13 PM.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X