Search Details

Word: footings (lookup in dictionary) (lookup stats)
Dates: during 1960-1969
Sort By: most recent first (reverse)


Usage:

While Harvard's relief staff ran out to the bullpen, southpaw Nickens hit Jim Murray with a wild pitch and left fielder Tom Peterson added a second 358-foot home run to left. Kalinowski came in and struck out Denny Hayden to hold Army to a 5-0 lead...

Author: NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED | Title: Army Slams 2 Homers in First Inning; Coasts to Easy 11-2 Win Over Crimson | 4/28/1969 | See Source »

Going into the 18th, Oldfield and Cornell's Bill Powers were even for the match. Both got onto the green in three. Oldfield had a ten foot putt for a par; Powers a six-footer. Oldfield tapped his putt too hard, sending it two feet past the pin. Powers gave him the putt--which is the usual and gentlemanly procedure. Powers, who must have anticipated an easy par and a victory, blew it. He three-putted the green and lost the match...

Author: NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED | Title: Golfers Eke Out Seventh Win, 4-3 | 4/26/1969 | See Source »

...minor decoration of the original volume, unhappily left out in the re-edition, were Auden's hit-or-miss photographs. Its principal treasure was and is his long poem, Letter to Lord Byron. Few poets since Byron have tried to crack the great romantic's seven-foot whip, and only Auden among Englishmen has succeeded, as here...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Books: Putting Time on Ice | 4/25/1969 | See Source »

Captain Bruce LoPucki, two and three down after the front nine, fought back on the second nine to defeat his Columbia opponent 5 and 4 and the Penn rival one up. Yank Heisler also, offset a bad first nine by dropping 25 and 30 foot putts. He disposed of the Quaker golfer by the 15th hold and wrapped up the match on the next hole...

Author: NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED | Title: Crimson Golfers Win Third Match | 4/21/1969 | See Source »

...apartments and must have more built fast. Unfortunately, though it is little-understood or read by otherwise well-informed Cambridge citizens, the whole Cambridge zoning law is what severely limits substantial new construction. For example, how many readers are aware of the fact that our city has a 35-foot height limit in its biggest zoning district? Shouldn't we question whether this is an appropriate limit for an international city of today? One need not support all proposed changes in the zoning code (like the one finally rejected for the Baird Atomic complex) to support some needed liberalizations...

Author: NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED | Title: ONLY ONE ROOMMATE? | 4/15/1969 | See Source »

Previous | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | Next