In 1968 was the pitchers mound lowered, to favor the pitchers? If yes, Why?

Below is a quote from the source site:

~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!

It was a combination of things that happened in 1968 that drove the bozo owners to lower the mound. Recall, too, that we're just another 3 years from the abomination of the designated hitter in AL, also a spinoff of the supposed domination of pitching that was happening at the time. Several marvelous pitching performances took place in 1968: first of all, Bob Gibson led the NL in ERA with 1.12 for the year, while in the AL Luis Tiant had the best ERA with 1.60. 1968 was the year that Denny McLain won 31 games for Detroit. Couple this with the fact that Carl Yazstremski led the AL in hitting in 1968 with only a .301 average (NL leader Pete Rose hit .326), and you have a prescription for owner panic. Any true baseball fan loves excellence in any phase of the game, and he knows that there's an ebb and flow to the seasons. Any true baseball fan loves excellent pitching, pitching duels, defensive games. The rubes and casual fans are the ones who think baseball is about balls flying over the fences all the time. But the bozo owners are interested in only one thing: $$$. And if messing with the guts of the game like the size of the mound will bring more bucks, they'll do it.

Keep in mind that after the offense-inflated 1961 expansion year, baseball made some changes to favor the pitcher, which created what has been called the "second dead-ball era" as batting averages and ERA's plummeted. Changes like lowering the mound after 1968 was an attempt to correct some of the pro-pitcher changes made earlier in the decade and level the playing field (no pun intended).

Any pitcher who takes 20 minutes between pitches. Stares into the catcher's sign, steps off the rubber, rubs the ball, goes to grab the resin bag, spits on the grass, adjusts his cap/cup, stares again, shakes off the catcher, steps off and calls for a mound conference, asks for a new ball, checks out the hot blond in the third row, ties his shoelaces, discusses with the shortstop the latest news from London, rubs the ball again... You get the idea. For some reason, Boston's Josh Beckett comes to mind, although there may be even worse offenders. The same applies to hitters' antics in the box which annoy me the most (I was a pitcher in high school). You don't need to step out and take a few practice swings when the bat didn't even leave your shoulder.

There is more to a pitcher's mound than the height. The slope and length matters.

A higher mound favors pitchers, the mound was lowered to help the batters, since MLB thinks people come to see hitting not pitching.

Sometimes what the league thinks will happen when they change a rule doesn't.

The mound height was lowered AFTER the 1968 season, in large part because of the extreme performances you cite.

Also, Drysdale had his 58 (and 2/3) scoreless innings pitched streak, breaking a record held by Walter Johnson. 1968 was a strange year.

No, it was lowered after that season to favor the hitters. It was done because offense had become so anemic that owners wanted to inject a little more scoring back into the game.

a lower mound favors the hitters and it was done to stimulate runs scored. all leagues do that kind of thing because most people (myself excluded) feel offense is more exciting to watch.

Lowering the mound favors hitters. And it was done after that season.

it was lowered to help the hitters, not the pitchers ..... and it was because of Gibsons 1.12 ERA.

It was changed to favor batters and "spice up" the game...remember, the DH rule was looming in the very near future as well.