PDA

View Full Version : Was the 1919 World Series fixed? I am not so sure anymore


Fenway
03-18-2004, 02:18 PM
The 1919 World Series (http://retrosheet.org/boxesetc/YPS_1919.htm) appeared to be a mismatch the experts claimed. One team had 96 Wins, the most of any team since the 1912 Red Sox. The other team had but 88. When the Series was over, people questioned if it was on the level. A year later we found out, maybe not.

But one simple fact has been lost on history. It was the REDS that had 96 wins, not the White Sox.

1919 Cincinnati Reds (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/TCIN01919.htm)


There are some historians that have suggested that the Black Sox scandal was more about getting Ban Johnson the founder of the American League out of baseball, than the games themselves being fixed.

However one thing can not be overlooked, the 1919 Cincinnati Reds may well have beaten the White Sox anyways.

Baby Fisk
03-18-2004, 02:31 PM
You can't wholly rely on regular season records to project what will happen in a WS, fenway. In 1906, the Cubbies won a record 116 regular season games and should have destroyed their WS opponents, the humble American League Chicago Baseball Club. Instead, the White Sox beat the Cubs in 6. You can never tell what will happen in a WS (as a Red Sox fan, you know that more than most).

I have yet to see any of the evidence pointing to a fixed 1919 WS be debunked. The fix was in, no one here is proud of it, we wish it weren't so, but that's what happened. :(:

Fenway
03-18-2004, 02:40 PM
What is really sad is the hotel that the fix was spawned in a block from Fenway Park now has a marker outside boasting that fact


Buckminster Hotel Boston (http://www.bostonhotelbuckminster.com/aboutus.html)

Railsplitter
03-18-2004, 02:42 PM
According the the first book in the Baseball Hall of Shame series, the Reds' performance was almost as bad as the Sox. From 1919 to 1921, the Series was a best of nine, and it went to eigth games in 1919. One of the three games was won by the Sox was won by Eddie Cicotte. The other two games were by Dickie Kerr, who was not part of the fix. Draw your own conclusions.

Baby Fisk
03-18-2004, 02:46 PM
LOL, hey fenway nice signature. Isn't Affleck a hero now that he's gotten rid of JLo? Won't the club paint the seats they sat in during the ALCS red in tribute? :D:

maurice
03-18-2004, 03:46 PM
The problem with this theory is that all the evidence (including Joe Jackson's sworn grand jury testimony) indicates that several Sox players took money to throw the series. Other than that, it's a solid theory.

:)

owensmouth
03-18-2004, 04:19 PM
The same group of Sox players did much the same thing in 1920. They threw the last series, allowing the Indians to be American League champions.

Fenway
03-18-2004, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by Baby Fisk
You can't wholly rely on regular season records to project what will happen in a WS, fenway. In 1906, the Cubbies won a record 116 regular season games and should have destroyed their WS opponents, the humble American League Chicago Baseball Club.

You can win a fortune in Boston bars asking the question, who has been in more World Series, the Red Sox or the Cubs...hard to believe the Flubs have been in 10% of them.

Saw this yesterday in the NY Times

We sing the songs our fathers sang

when they were growing up,

rebel songs of Erin's Isle

in the South Side Irish pubs,

and when it comes to baseball

we have two favorite clubs,

the go-go White Sox

and whoever plays the Cubs."


http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/17/national/17IRIS.html

TornLabrum
03-18-2004, 10:57 PM
Originally posted by owensmouth
The same group of Sox players did much the same thing in 1920. They threw the last series, allowing the Indians to be American League champions.

That would have been damned hard for them to do considering they were all suspended about a week before the end of the 1920 season.

kempsted
03-18-2004, 11:57 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
That would have been damned hard for them to do considering they were all suspended about a week before the end of the 1920 season.

Correct you are.

It is kind of interesting - the Sox won in 1917. 1918 we were at war and most of the major league rosters were completely different so there is a big asterisk by it. 1919 the Sox could have won (according to usual story) and in 1920 they were in front but then the story and hearing etc all started and 8 guys thrown off the team before it ended.

So without the War and the thrown series the Sox could have won the world series 1917 -1920 and possibly even beyond.

DSpivack
03-19-2004, 01:12 AM
The 1919 Series went 8 games- out of 9. How does one throw a Series and still win 3 games?

pudge
03-19-2004, 02:28 AM
Originally posted by DSpivack
The 1919 Series went 8 games- out of 9. How does one throw a Series and still win 3 games?

Because one of the Sox pitchers wasn't in on it, another pitcher changed his mind half way through, and the Reds were lousy.

:)

Fenway
03-19-2004, 09:37 AM
Don't forget Hugh Fullerton was hearing rumors that the Reds were in the bag as well.

Still when you look at both teams, there is no sound reason the WS should have been the heavy favorite especially with the extra game being in Cincinnati. Obviously there was more Chicago $$$ in play as Chicago was the bigger city.



Originally posted by pudge
Because one of the Sox pitchers wasn't in on it, another pitcher changed his mind half way through, and the Reds were lousy.

:)

Railsplitter
03-19-2004, 10:09 AM
Originally posted by DSpivack
The 1919 Series went 8 games- out of 9. How does one throw a Series and still win 3 games?

Easy. Like I said, Dickie Kerr, who wasn't in on the fix, won two games. Eddie Cicotte and Claude "Lefty" Williams were pitchers, so that leaves six position players. Fred Mc Mullan (I think that's his name) was a utility player who only had two at bats he knew the fix was on and wanted hush money. That leaves five. Buck Weaver knew about the fix and played straight, but kept quiet. That leaves four. If Joe Jackson was really playing to lose, then he would have hit .500 on the level. That leaves Felsch, Reisberg and Gandil.

I don't know if teams had 25 man rosters in 1919, but if so, that would leave a minimum of 17 on the level.

Railsplitter
03-19-2004, 02:14 PM
There's been a trip to the library since my last post. In the 1919 Series, the Reds and White Sox both committed 12 errors. Also, the Reds blew a 4-0 lead in Game 6.

TornLabrum
03-19-2004, 09:55 PM
Originally posted by Railsplitter
Easy. Like I said, Dickie Kerr, who wasn't in on the fix, won two games. Eddie Cicotte and Claude "Lefty" Williams were pitchers, so that leaves six position players. Fred Mc Mullan (I think that's his name) was a utility player who only had two at bats he knew the fix was on and wanted hush money. That leaves five. Buck Weaver knew about the fix and played straight, but kept quiet. That leaves four. If Joe Jackson was really playing to lose, then he would have hit .500 on the level. That leaves Felsch, Reisberg and Gandil.

I don't know if teams had 25 man rosters in 1919, but if so, that would leave a minimum of 17 on the level.

Rosters back then were closer to 20 than to 25 players.