Ruth is the greatest by far, check out these notes.Neither Bonds NOR Aaron beat him

Search

Cui servire est regnare
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
11,033
Tokens
As a sidelight to his prominent role in changing the game to the power-game, the frequency and popularity of Ruth's home runs eventually led to a rule change pertaining to those hit in sudden-death mode (bottom of the ninth or later inning). Prior to 1931, as soon as the first necessary run to win the game scored, the play was over, and the batter was credited only with the number of bases needed to drive in the winning run. Thus, if the score was 3-2 with the bases loaded in the bottom of the ninth, and the batter smacked an "over the fence home run", the game would end at 4-3, with the batter only allowed a double, and the runners officially stopped on 2nd and 3rd (since they weren't needed to win the game). The new rule allowed the entire play to complete, justified on the grounds that the ball was dead and that all runners could freely advance, thus granting the full allotment of HR and RBI's to the batter, as we know it today. Several players lost home runs that way, including Ruth, whose career total would have been changed to 715 if historians during the 1960s had been successful in pursuing this matter. Major League Baseball elected not to retrofit the records to the modern rules, and Ruth's total stayed at 714.
Another rules change that affected Ruth was the method used by umpires to judge potential home runs when the batted ball left the field near a foul pole. Before 1931, i.e through most of Ruth's most productive years, the umpire called the play based on the ball's final resting place "when last seen". Thus, if a ball went over the fence fair, and curved behind the foul pole, it was ruled foul. Beginning in 1931 and continuing to the present day, the rule was changed to require the umpire to judge based on the point where the ball cleared the fence. Jenkinson's book (p.374-375) lists 78 foul balls near the foul pole in Ruth's career, and the research indicates at least 50 of them were likely to have been home runs under the modern rule.
 

Banned
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
80,046
Tokens
That is amazing and I find it hard to believe we've never heard this ever mentioned ... that really is a stunning twist to this record...

IT'S QUITE POSSIBLE RUTH HIT 70+ HOMERS IN 1927!
 

New member
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
171
Tokens
right

ruth played against batting practice pitchers.

I want to see ruth hit homeruns facing 3 different pitchers a game while they are all on their A game.

these records are not comparable. different eras derffirent style of baseball being played
 

Banned
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
80,046
Tokens
right

ruth played against batting practice pitchers.

I want to see ruth hit homeruns facing 3 different pitchers a game while they are all on their A game.

these records are not comparable. different eras derffirent style of baseball being played

why does everyone seem to think today's pitchers are so much better...the same guys who can't pitch past 100 pitches per game no matter what the inning, and an extra days rest....the pitching in MLB peaked sometime around 1980....and by far was greater in the 60's and 70's over today.

also remember this, the game was played in terrible conditions back then, with poor equipment (bats, balls, lighting)

do you really think a ML baseball in 1927 batted with a 1927 Hillerich and Bradsby would go as far as today's balls? no way!

Long live Ruth! Long live Babe! :suomi:
 

powdered milkman
Joined
Aug 4, 2006
Messages
22,984
Tokens
right

ruth played against batting practice pitchers.

I want to see ruth hit homeruns facing 3 different pitchers a game while they are all on their A game.

these records are not comparable. different eras derffirent style of baseball being played
mr wonderful? that you?
 

New member
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
171
Tokens
I think it all evens out in the end.

I don't see how a wooden bat from then and now would very much different.

Just go look at the stats of how many HR's da Babe hit after the 7th inning and get back to me on the pitchers issue
 

Banned
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
80,046
Tokens
I think it all evens out in the end.

I don't see how a wooden bat from then and now would very much different.

Just go look at the stats of how many HR's da Babe hit after the 7th inning and get back to me on the pitchers issue

Generalizing lol...
You don't think the equipment matters? ok :ohno: good day.
 

Banned
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
80,046
Tokens
No blacks,no dominicans,no japanese, no media circus,no contest.

no hitting 24 more homers (at age 38) than you ever did in your entire career either.

BTW- just how many japanese are even in MLB pitching? that is a non issue.
 

New member
Joined
Jan 15, 2006
Messages
384
Tokens
As a sidelight to his prominent role in changing the game to the power-game, the frequency and popularity of Ruth's home runs eventually led to a rule change pertaining to those hit in sudden-death mode (bottom of the ninth or later inning). Prior to 1931, as soon as the first necessary run to win the game scored, the play was over, and the batter was credited only with the number of bases needed to drive in the winning run. Thus, if the score was 3-2 with the bases loaded in the bottom of the ninth, and the batter smacked an "over the fence home run", the game would end at 4-3, with the batter only allowed a double, and the runners officially stopped on 2nd and 3rd (since they weren't needed to win the game). The new rule allowed the entire play to complete, justified on the grounds that the ball was dead and that all runners could freely advance, thus granting the full allotment of HR and RBI's to the batter, as we know it today. Several players lost home runs that way, including Ruth, whose career total would have been changed to 715 if historians during the 1960s had been successful in pursuing this matter. Major League Baseball elected not to retrofit the records to the modern rules, and Ruth's total stayed at 714.
Another rules change that affected Ruth was the method used by umpires to judge potential home runs when the batted ball left the field near a foul pole. Before 1931, i.e through most of Ruth's most productive years, the umpire called the play based on the ball's final resting place "when last seen". Thus, if a ball went over the fence fair, and curved behind the foul pole, it was ruled foul. Beginning in 1931 and continuing to the present day, the rule was changed to require the umpire to judge based on the point where the ball cleared the fence. Jenkinson's book (p.374-375) lists 78 foul balls near the foul pole in Ruth's career, and the research indicates at least 50 of them were likely to have been home runs under the modern rule.

While you were looking up rules that were in effect and changed in 1931, I guess you overlooked the one that was effect until that year which allowed balls that bounced into the stands to be ruled as home runs-in other words, what today would be a ground rule double. And remember, not only was Yankee Stadium only 296 feet down the right field line, as it is today, but it had a three foot high fence, unlike today. Since you're tacking on 50 dingers to Big Belly's total, you wanna enlighten us with how many of those cheesy kind of dingers padded it?
 

Banned
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
80,046
Tokens
While you were looking up rules that were in effect and changed in 1931, I guess you overlooked the one that was effect until that year which allowed balls that bounced into the stands to be ruled as home runs-in other words, what today would be a ground rule double. And remember, not only was Yankee Stadium only 296 feet down the right field line, as it is today, but it had a three foot high fence, unlike today. Since you're tacking on 50 dingers to Big Belly's total, you wanna enlighten us with how many of those cheesy kind of dingers padded it?


This is a great point as well..

Also another rule that allowed for higher avg's and made it easier to get a hit....you could bunt a ball fair, it could roll foul but was still considered a fair ball if it hit in fair grounds....

I read Ty Cobb mastered this, even using 'english' so the ball would squib foul....now how about that one? lol
 

Cui servire est regnare
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
11,033
Tokens
While you were looking up rules that were in effect and changed in 1931, I guess you overlooked the one that was effect until that year which allowed balls that bounced into the stands to be ruled as home runs-in other words, what today would be a ground rule double. And remember, not only was Yankee Stadium only 296 feet down the right field line, as it is today, but it had a three foot high fence, unlike today. Since you're tacking on 50 dingers to Big Belly's total, you wanna enlighten us with how many of those cheesy kind of dingers padded it?
well if you are so smart, how many "ground rule double" homers were hit and how many foul pole homers were disallowed? I'm sure he hit closer to 800 than we realize. And at a time when his closest competition wasn't even in the 500 homer club.
 

New member
Joined
Jan 15, 2006
Messages
384
Tokens
well if you are so smart, how many "ground rule double" homers were hit and how many foul pole homers were disallowed? I'm sure he hit closer to 800 than we realize. And at a time when his closest competition wasn't even in the 500 homer club.

I don't know, and neither do you. But I'll bet there were a helluva lot more ground rule "homers"-especially with a three foot porch to "surmount" in half of your games-then there were walk off dingers with guys on base in front of him-or, for that matter balls that went out fair and landed foul. And one of my main points is that I find it strange that you happened to dig up rule changes from that year that supported your argument but somehow overlooked a change that didn't...
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,773
Tokens
1920: Enter the "lively ball." Australian yarn, said to be stronger than its American equivalent, may be wound tighter, so the ball’s bounce and hardness increase. [1.09]

1926: It is a ground-rule double instead of a home run if the ball is hit over the fence in fair territory if the fence is less than 250 feet from home plate. [6.09]

The cushioned cork-center baseball is introduced. [1.09]

1931: A fair ball that bounces through or over a fence or into the stands is considered a ground-rule double instead of a home run. [6.09]
 

Cui servire est regnare
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
11,033
Tokens
1920: Enter the "lively ball." Australian yarn, said to be stronger than its American equivalent, may be wound tighter, so the ball’s bounce and hardness increase. [1.09]

1926: It is a ground-rule double instead of a home run if the ball is hit over the fence in fair territory if the fence is less than 250 feet from home plate. [6.09]

The cushioned cork-center baseball is introduced. [1.09]

1931: A fair ball that bounces through or over a fence or into the stands is considered a ground-rule double instead of a home run. [6.09]
damn, given this there should be 2 seperate and distinct records...they weren't playing the same game or on the same playing field as today...
 

New member
Joined
Apr 4, 2007
Messages
520
Tokens
Im trying to picture a ball hitting the turf hard enough to bounce out of the park over a 3 foot fence. Have to be pretty high, and deep, as there were no warning tracks back then, just turf to the wall. Hmmmm.

What is even more puzzling is that not one sports historian, or writer since the 20's has any stats on Babe's bouncing homerun numbers. They have every other stat, but that one.

One other thing, the foul poles had no screens on them until the 50's, and they were put up to help umpires. Wonder if there was some heat in years past over missed calls?

If Babe hadn't "wasted" those prime 5+ years of his early career amassing a 94-46 record as a pitcher......he would probably have (conservatively) another 120 home runs. Remember, he pitched from age 20 thru 25. Prime years.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,108,621
Messages
13,452,942
Members
99,426
Latest member
bodyhealthtechofficia
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com