Tuesday, June 26, 2018

When baseball teams travel East they need to battle fatigue and jet lag




Every year the Seattle Mariners fly more miles than any Major League Baseball team. Seattle is the furthest away from other Major League Baseball cities. Flying to the Pacific Northwest, where the Mariners play, requires the most miles and the longest flights.

According to stadiumwiz.com, Coors Field, where the Colorado Rockies play, is the park closest to Safeco Field, the home of the well traveled Mariners. Coors Field is 677 miles from Safeco Field.

Additionally, the American League West, the division where the Mariners play, is the division where teams are most spread out from each other. The American League West features teams in Washington state, California and Texas. So, even when playing division games, the Mariners must fly many miles.

According to stadiumwiz.com, the Mariners must travel 40,815 miles this season. The Oakland A's, Los Angeles Angels, Houston Astros and the San Diego Padraes travel the next most amount of miles.

The Chicago White Sox, Milwaukee Brewers, Pittsburgh Pirates, Detroit Tigers and the Cincinnati Reds travel the least amount of miles. Although the Reds travel the least amount of miles, they are in last place in their division. In contrast, the Mariners are in playoff contention.

Nevertheless, jet lag is an issue for athletes. Since the Mariners travel the greatest amount of miles, they are more susceptible to jet lag, which could effect an athlete's performance.

Rachael Lallensack, of sciencemag.org, says that "Jet lag is known for its fatigue- inducing effects, most of which stem from a mismatch between a person's internal clock and the time zone he or she is in, something called 'circadian mismanagement.' This misalignment is especially strong when a person's day is shorter than it should be - which happens when people travel East - previous research has shown." So, when the Mariners and other western teams travel East, they may get fatigued ,which could put them at a disadvantage. Lallensack emphasized that a new study shows that pitching and base running may be the most effected by the fatigue.

Lallensack points out that Ravi Allada, a neurobiologist at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, examined 10 years of baseball statistics from 1992 to 2011. The study showed that teams that traveled East for a new series had worse offensive and defensive stats than the team that was already there and did not have to play right after arriving East.

Lallensack says that even home teams that travelled back East sometimes played differently. She says "Home teams played less aggressive offense after traveling, especially if they had just traveled East. In such games, players were less likely to attempt doubles, triples and stolen bases, all of which require bolder base running." Perhaps, the fatigue from traveling East effected a team's approach and their assertiveness on the basepaths.

In an interview with Fox32 News, Allada says "What we found were jet lagged pitchers gave up more home runs and this effect was large enough to essentially erase any home field advantage that a pitcher might have." So, after returning home, a team's starting pitcher did not necessarily have a home field advantage.

In order to counteract this problem, Allada suggests that "a pitcher could be sent out early to the destination of where they're going to pitch their next game. That allows their internal clocks to adjust to the new time zone and hopefully mitigate the effects of jet lag." This is one way for a starting pitcher to counteract jet lag and fatigue.

Allada references the 2016 National League Championship Series to support the findings of their study. Allada points out that Los Angeles Dodger pitcher Clayton Kershaw shut out the Cubs in Los Angeles in game 2. However, in game 6, after returning to Chicago from Los Angeles where game 5 was played, Kershaw gave up 2 home runs and was not effective. Allada says "This is sort of what our research would have predicted." Allada does not totally attribute Kershaw's ineffectiveness in game 6 to fatigue and jet lag, but believes it could have been a "contributing factor." This may be an example that supports Allada's findings.

Allada points out that the Dodgers "could have sent Kershaw to Chicago earlier so he could adjust his clock and get ready for that game." Perhaps, the Dodgers and other Major League Baseball teams will consider doing this in the future.

Allada believes that baseball teams are aware of the effect of jet lag on a team's performance. He hopes that his research will encourage teams to try to offset potential jet lag and travel related fatigue in the future.

Wednesday, June 20, 2018

Reggie Jackson hits three home runs on three consecutive pitches



Reggie Jackson was one of my first favorite players. I can recall going to the Oakdale Mall with my family and friends in 1980 and getting a Reggie Jackson baseball card in a pack of cards. I remember the pride of getting a card of Reggie Jackson. I bought a replica New York Yankee hat at the mall as well. I painted #44 on the back of the helmet.

Reggie Jackson was meant to play in New York. He was made for the bright lights. He was suited for the city that never sleeps. Reggie Jackson was meant to be a Yankee. The excitement and fanfare that accompanied playing in New York fit Jackson perfectly.

Jackson was quotable. He was good for the New York media, which is always looking for a story. He once predicted that if he played in New York, they would name a candy bar after him. They did. The "Reggie" bar was unveiled in 1978. It had peanuts and caramel and it was covered in chocolate.

Jackson created controversy. When he joined the Yankees, he said he was the "straw that stirred the drink." He implied that he would be the new leader for the Yankees. However, Thurman Munson was the captain of the team. He was well respected in the Yankee locker room. Some of the players resented Jackson's attitude and wanted Munson to remain the leader of the team.

Jackson was brash and confident. When he was asked if it bothered him that fans booed him, he said "fans don't boo nobodies." He took the boos as a compliment. He felt the boos were a sign of recognition of his importance to the Yankees and to baseball.

Jackson was a polarizing figure. When he batted on the road, he was always booed. When he batted at home, he was booed at times and cheered at other times. The Yankee fans had a love/hate relationship with Jackson.

Jackson was social and engaging. He was a part of the New York night life. He was a part of the New York scene. He was often seen out on the town with a girl fiend or friends. He embraced New York city.

Jackson spent five years playing for the Yankees. I remember when he left as a free agent for California. The Angels were willing to make him an every day outfielder, whereas the Yankees wanted him to play part of the time in the outfield and serve part time as a designated hitter. Jackson wanted to continue to play the outfield, so he signed with California.

He actually played in more games with California than New York. However, Jackson was meant to be a Yankee. Many identify him as a Yankee. He entered the hall of fame as a Yankee.

On October 18th, 1977, in game 6 of the World Series, Reggie Jackson hit three home runs on three consecutive pitches.

Keith Jackson, Howard Cosell and Tom Seaver called the game on television.

Jackson stepped up to the plate and smashed an offering by Hooton into the upper deck in right field. Keith Jackson said "Long fly ball to right field... It is.." Then Cosell interjected by saying "Goodbye! A big, big World Series for Reggie Jackson. Despite all the blather about his discontent with Billy Martin as he comes up with his third home run of the series. Quickly, the Yankees go ahead."

The "blather" that Cosell was referring to was the arguing that had happened between Jackson and manager Billy Martin. Both Jackson and Martin had strong personalities and they would often clash.

In his second at bat, Jackson stepped up to the plate and hit a pitch from Elias Sosa into the right field seats. Keith Jackson said "Hard shot, right field, It's gone." Exuberantly, Cosell said "Oh, what a World Series for Reggie Jackson. First pitch, right in his wheel house as Tom Seaver would say. Reggie Jackson, now well on his way to becoming the Most Valuable Player in the 1977 World Series if the Yankees go on to win." Keith Jackson followed up by saying "Reggie Jackson has seen two pitches tonight in the strike zone. Two. And he has has hit both of them in the seats." Jackson and Cosell did a good job of combining on the call. For the first two home runs, Seaver had been silent. Only Jackson and Cosell had spoken.

In Jackson's third at bat, the Yankees' fans were standing and clapping. They may have anticipated another home run. In any event, they knew it was a memorable evening in the Bronx.

Charlie Hough was on in relief. He got the sign from Dodger catcher Steve Yeager and was ready to pitch. He threw a slow curve ball that dipped close to knee level. Jackson promptly hit the ball to the deepest part of the ball park. The ball landed in the black section of centerfield and bounced up for a lucky fan who retrieved the ball.

On the call, Keith Jackson said "High.." And then, in unison, Seaver and Cosell exclaimed "Goodbye!" Cosell said "Forget about who the Most Valuable Player is in the World Series. How this man has responded to pressure. Oh, what a beam on his face. How can you blame him?" Then, hyperbolically, Cosell added "He's answered the whole world!" Cosell certainly appreciated Jackson's accomplishment.

After the third home run, Seaver said "Reggie Jackson's last at bat probably in the 1977 World Series. And that was a monster in itself. 475 feet, probably." The home run was to the deepest part of Yankee stadium and it was probably between 450 and 475 feet.

As Jackson was being congratulated in the Yankee dugout, Cosell continued by saying "What are they thinking now? After all the furer. After all the hassling. It came down to this. A whole long season." Cosell tried to put the moment into perspective. He wanted fans to appreciate the drama that had taken place during the season.

As the fans chanted "Reggie," the proud slugger came out for a curtain call and lifted up both hands and faced the appreciative crowd. He mouthed the words "thank you." It was a memorable moment for the fans of the Yankees. It was a memorable moment for the Yankees' players and the organization.

In an interview with Chris Russo, of Sirius Radio in 2009, Jackson remembered the evening. Jackson said "I had a great batting practice that night. In batting practice that night, I hit the last five minutes and I probably took 50 swings and had to hit about 35 baseballs in the stands." Jackson also emphasized that he had been swinging the bat well in Los Angeles for the previous three games. So, Jackson had a lot of confidence entering game 6.

Jackson said that he had been walked in his first at bat in game 6. Hooton pitched around him because no men were on base. However, in the second at bat, Hooton had to pitch to Jackson because there were two men on base. So, he did not want to walk Jackson again. He had to throw strikes. This meant that Jackson would get a good pitch to hit.

Regarding his second at bat against Hooton, Jackson said "The scouting report on me was to pitch me in, so during post season they're going to stick to the scouting report. So, I'd look for the ball in and prayed that he'd throw a strike. He threw me a strike. He threw me a strike and I hit it out." So, Jackson was ready and he anticipated what pitch Hooton would throw. He responded with a good swing and a home run.

Jackson also explained his second at bat to Russo. Sosa had entered the game in relief. Jackson said "Next time up, I got lucky. A new pitcher came in. He wanted to follow the scouting report. I hadn't hit his fastball yet. He hadn't made an attempt to get the ball in so he took his shot. He threw me a strike. I hit it out." So, Jackson thought the first two pitchers would follow the scouting report. Therefore, Jackson correctly anticipated what pitch he would receive.

For the third home run, Jackson, again, faced a new pitcher. Jackson said "And the next guy came in. Charlie Hough. And I'd had a tremendous record against Wilbur Wood and several knuckle ball pitchers." Jackson added that maybe the Dodgers' organization did not know that he did well against knuckle ball pitchers. After, Hough's name was announced as the new pitcher, Jackson knew that he had a chance to hit another home run.

Jackson's three home runs on three consecutive pitches in game 6 of the 1977 World Series was one of the signature moments of his career. The Yankees clinched the World Series with the game 6 win, and Jackson was named the Most Valuable Player of the World Series. It was one of the most memorable nights in the history of the New York Yankees and of Major League Baseball.






Wednesday, June 13, 2018

Free agency allows super stars to chase a title




Fans expect a superstar to win multiple titles. However, fans also expect a superstar to carry a team to a championship. Superstars feel pressure to put themselves in position to win multiple championships. However, fans also want super stars to prove that they can do it without other great players.

Superstars like Lebron James and Kevin Durant are in an impossible position. They are expected to chase titles, but be the alpha players on their team. It is difficult for James, Durant and other super stars to fulfill both expectations simultaneously.

Judging superstars by how many titles they win started with Michael Jordan's career. After Jordan lead the Chicago Bulls to 6 NBA championships in his final 6 complete years with the Bulls, his championship pedigree became the barometer by which other superstars are measured.

Kobe Bryant won 5 championships with the Los Angeles Lakers, but he hoped to win one more so that he could equal Jordan's 6 titles. However, Bryant's 5 championships with the Lakers became the silver standard for modern players, while Jordan's 6 championships remains the gold standard.

Of course, Bill Russell won 11 championships with the Boston Celtics in 13 years. His championships are the true gold standard, but most modern fans refer to Jordan's 6 titles when they evaluate James, Durant and other superstars. However, sometimes Wilt Chamberlain's career is compared to Russell's with fans often saying that Russell was better because he won more championships.

Some fans are quick to point out that Oscar Robertson won one title in 1971 after the Milwaukee Bucks drafted and developed Kareem Abdul Jabaar. Fans are also quick to point out that Jerry West's Lakers finally beat the Boston Celtics after former Celtic Bill Sharman guided the Lakers to West's only title. Others remember that Elgin Baylor, despite an excellent career with the Lakers, never won a title.

At the end of their careers, Karl Malone and Gary Payton joined the Lakers in an unsuccessful attempt to win a championship. Malone lead the Utah Jazz to a Western Conference Championship. Likewise, Payton lead the Seattle Sonics to an NBA finals appearance. Both teams lost to the Bulls.

Much is made of Charles Barkley's inability to win an NBA championship with the Philadelphia 76ers, Phoenix Suns and the Houston Rockets. However, Barkley lead the Phoenix Suns to an NBA title appearance against the Chicago Bulls in 1993. The Bulls won in 6 games.

Most fans give Barkley, Malone, Payton and Baylor their due. Most fans understand that they had excellent careers despite their inability to win a NBA championship.

Through collective bargaining, NBA players have the right to free agency. It makes sense that athletes have the right to decide where and for whom they want to work. Otherwise, the owners would have all of the power. Free agency gives the players negotiating options and bargaining rights. Free agency makes sense from the standpoint of labor.

However, there is a downside to free agency. There is a downside to players changing teams. NBA players draft and develop players only to lose them to another team. Players lack loyalty to one team or one city. Players are willing to go from one team to another. Sometimes players leave a team for a rival. Many have pointed out that free agency puts a strain on fan loyalty.

While playing for the Oklahoma City Thunder, Kevin Durant lead the team to the Western Conference Finals against the Golden State Warriors. The Thunder lead the Warriors 3-2 before the Golden State came back and won the series. The Warriors lost the NBA championship to the Cleveland Cavaliers that year. Following the Championship, Durant signed with the Warriors, the team that he tried to beat only a couple of months earlier.

Durant's decision shows that some players are willing to forgo loyalties to put themselves in a better position to win. Others dispense with loyalty to make more money. Either way, free agency puts a strain on fan loyalty. Some fans may ask "why remain loyal when the players leave for another team?" It's a fair question.

Durant's decision to join Golden State reflects the quandary that superstars face. Should they stay with one team and be patient? Or should they go to a team in a better position to win? Obviously, the greater challenge is to stay with one team and be patient as the team continually improves and moves towards a championship. However, super stars may feel that they need to win a championship for their legacy.

Durant is a free agent again. Should he leave Golden State now that he won two championships with them? Should he go to a team where he can be the unquestioned leader? He will never be the unquestioned leader with the Warriors. Steph Curry, Klay Thompson and Draymond Greene will always have one more championship with Golden State than Durant will. Curry, Thompson and Greene were drafted and developed by the Warriors. By contrast, Durant was drafted and developed by Oklahoma City. Durant was signed as a free agent by Golden State. He will probably never be as popular in Golden State as Curry, Thompson and Greene.

If Durant goes to a team that he can call his own, it may be better for his career. If he goes to a team that he can lead to the finals, it would add to his legacy as a player. It would also be a greater challenge than it would be to re sign with Golden State. Obviously, where Durant goes is up to him. He has the right to decide.

Durant could consider going home to Washington to play for the Wizards. Durant grew up rooting for the Wizards. However, the Wizards do not have the cap space to sign Durant and he showed no interest in signing there two years ago. Washington would have to trade Otto Porter Jr. to create cap space. However, it would be a good story if Durant went to Washington to lead his home town team to a potential Eastern Conference Championship. It would parallel James' success in Cleveland.

Of course, the analogy between Durant and James is not perfect. James was drafted by Cleveland and went back there after four years with Miami, whereas Durant was drafted by Oklahoma City. In any event, the Wizards would have to make a couple of trades to create enough cap space.

Durant could consider going to the New York Knicks. They could consider trading Tim Hardaway, Jr. to create cap space. However, it's unlikely that another team would trade for his contract which has 54 million dollars left over the next three years. Durant could partner with Krystal Prozingas to form a tough front line. It would be a challenge for Durant to bring success back to the big apple. In any event, Durant has shown no interest in going there. So, it's unlikely to happen.

James lead the Cleveland Cavaliers to the 2007 NBA finals where they were promptly swept by the superior San Antonio Spurs. James sighed with the Miami Heat before the 2010-11 season in order give himself a better chance at a championship. The Heat won the Eastern Conference Championship for four straight years. They won the 2012 and 2013 NBA championships.

After proving he could lead a team to an NBA championship, James decided to return to Cleveland after the 2014 season. Since then, James has lead the Cavaliers to four straight Eastern Conference Championships and an NBA title in 2016. It was the first professional championship in Cleveland since 1964 when the Cleveland Browns won the NFL championship.

Now, James is a free agent again. Will he stay in Cleveland or will he go somewhere else? Will he go to the team that has the best chance of winning a championship? Or will other factors help him decide where to go?

There is no ideal fit for James. If he goes to Philadelphia, Joel Embid and Ben Simmons, two young and developing players, may resent playing in James' shadow. The 76ers belong to Simmons and Embid. They will never truly be James' team. However, the Cavaliers are James' team. He is the on court leader of the team.

If James goes to Houston, he will have the share the basketball with James Harden and Chris Paul, two players who like the have the basketball in their hands. James is a facilitator, which is similar to the role that Paul plays. Also, James can create his own shot just like Harden can. How will James fit with Houston? James knows that he fits well in Cleveland, but it is uncertain how well he will blend with Harden and Paul.

Some have suggested that James may go to Los Angeles to play with the Lakers. This could happen if Paul George and Carmelo Anthony go there. However, even if James, George and Anthony sign with the Lakers, they may not be good enough to compete with Golden State.

James could consider going to San Antonio. He could play alongside La Marcus Aldridge and Kawai Leonard if Leonard re signs with San Antonio. Aldridge could play center, with James and the power forward and Leonard at the small forward. James could serve as a point forward because of his ability as a facilitator and passer. If James does leave Cleveland, San Antonio could be the logical destination.

As always, players will have interesting decisions to make this offseason. Championships are won during the season. However, championship teams are put together during the offseason.




Wednesday, June 6, 2018

Did Babe Ruth call his own shot?



In the 5th inning of game 3 of the 1932 World Series between the Chicago Cubs and the New York Yankees, Babe Ruth hit his final post season home run for the New York Yankees. It was his 50th home run in 41 post season games for the Bronx Bombers. This was arguably his most memorable home run because of the context of the home run and the debate that ensued.

Ruth hit the home run to center field. Prior to the pitch, legend has it that Ruth pointed to where he would hit the home run. There is no question that Ruth pointed with his right hand before he hit the home run. Pictures confirm that Ruth extended his right hand and pointed towards something. However, people debate whether he predicted a home run to center field or if he was pointing to the Cubs' fans to remind them that he had only two strikes.

Baseball writer Donald Honig described the scene. Honig said "The yelling from the Cubs dugout was positively sulfurous as well as from the fans. They were in on this. This was a Chicago crowd. And they were throwing things and yelling. Ruth was standing in the batters box, yelling back at them between pitches." So, the Chicago crowd created a hostile environment for Ruth. The Cubs' players in the dugout also heckled Ruth. Likewise, Ruth yelled back at them.

After a couple of strikes were called on Ruth, the fans continued to jeer him. Honig said "The volume coming from the stands was so loud that some of the Cubs players were coming out of the dugout and cupping their hands around their mouth to make sure that Ruth heard them. Then he makes his his famous gesture." So, the taunting and the jeering increased with each strike. This increased heckling added to the drama and excitement of the at bat.

Babe Ruth described the situation in the following way. Ruth said "Ill never forget it. It was a tough series. Both clubs were riding each other, doing everything to get each other's goat. Well, in this one particular time, when I went up to bat, Charlie Root was pitching. And the first pitched ball was a called strike. Well, I thought it was outside and didn't like it very much." So, not only was the Cubs dugout and crowd jeering Ruth, but he fell behind in the count. So, the jeering and taunting was getting louder.

After taking the second strike, Ruth says "Well, I stepped out of the box and by that time they were over there going crazy. I looked out at center field and I pointed. I said I'm going to hit the next pitched ball right past the flag pole. Well, the good Lord must have been with me." Ruth maintained that he called his home run. He asserted that he predicted where he would hit the next pitch.

Billy Herman, a player for the Cubs in this game, provided a rebuttal to Ruth's claim. Herman said "Gabby Hartnett was the catcher. He was right there. He knew what was going on. He said "No, he wasn't pointing to the stands. He was pointing to the fans and he called them back to the bench because they were riding him pretty hard. He just pointed two fingers to the dugout and said 'that's only two strikes.'" Herman's words seem persuasive because Hartnett would have had the closest perspective . He would have heard Ruth's words and possibly seen what direction Ruth was pointing.

Through the years, Ruth's family has maintained that he predicted the home run. However, Ruth was less adamant over time. Ruth said that predicting the home run would have been showing up the pitcher and that Root would have responded to the slight. Still, at times, Ruth tried to maintain his original narrative. Perhaps, Ruth thought his original story was good for baseball and his own legacy.



Ed Sherman, of the Chicago Tribune, wrote a book about Ruth's home run entitled "Babe Ruth's Called Shot." Sherman addresses issues associated with the home run such as the coverage of the home run, video footage and modern day opinions of the home run.

When discussing how the newspapers covered the story, Sherman refers to a piece written by John Evangelist Walsh for Sports Illustrated in 1965. Walsh looked at 38 sports writers who wrote for 27 different newspapers. Walsh concluded the following: "Viewing the 38 sports writers as a group, without regard for the weight to be assigned each, the most striking fact is the way they split almost equally on the question. While 21 have nothing to say about a Called Shot, 17 others either definitely record Ruth's pointing to the stands in centerfield, or in some manner strongly imply a similar prediction."Walsh thinks it's possible that some writers did not mention the Called Shot because they did not see it.

Richards Vidmar, of the New York Herald Tribune, said that Ruth responded to the "boos, hisses and jeers" of the Cubs' fans and that after two strikes were called on Ruth, he "held up two fingers and still grinned, the super showman." Vidmar does not suggest that Ruth called his home run.

John Drebinger of the New York Times said "A single lemon rolled out to the plate as Ruth came up in the fifth inning and in no mistaken motions the Babe notified the crowd that the nature of his retaliation would be a wallop right out of the confines of the park." So, Drebinger suggests that Ruth hit the home run in response to the taunting of the crowd. He suggests that Ruth predicted his home run.

Irving Vaughn, of the Chicago Tribune, said Ruth responded to the taunting from the Cub's dugout after getting two strikes by saying "That's only two strikes , boys. I still have one coming." Vaughn also said that Ruth held up two fingers. So, Vaughn suggests that Ruth did not call his shot, but simply reminded the Cubs' dugout that he had only two strikes.

Westbrook Pegler, of the Chicago Tribune, said that Ruth responded to Guy Bush, a Cubs pitcher who was in the dugout taunting Ruth. According to Pegler, "the Babe laughed derisively and gestured at him 'Wait, Mugg, I'm going to hit one out of the yard.' Pegler continues by saying "It was a privilege to be present because it is not likely that the scene will ever be repeated in all its elements. Many a hitter may make two home runs or possibly three in World Series play in years to come, but not the way Babe Ruth hit those two. Nor will you ever see an artist call his shot before hitting one of the longest drives ever made on the grounds in a World Series game, laughing and mocking the enemy with two strikes gone." Pegler suggests fans will never see a performance like Ruth had in this game. Pegler not only believes that Ruth called his own shot, but that no one will be able to do this again. Pegler suggests Ruth's homerun was not only unprecedented, but will never be equaled.

Paul Gallico of the New York Daily News, said "The Babe now held up two fingers and shoot them so that they seemed to reach right into the Cubs' dugout. And this time it was probably the most daring gesture ever made in any game, because it meant that he intended to knock the next one out of the park." Gallico saw the gesture as unprecedented and courageous. He believed that Ruth was confident that he would hit a home run on the next pitch.

Sherman did a good job of collecting different viewpoints from different sports writers who wrote about the home run. No one knows why each writer had a different view. Did some writers exaggerate the accomplishment? Did some writers fail to appreciate the magnitude of the moment? It's difficult to know what interpretation or viewpoint is the most accurate. The different view points add to the drama surrounding Ruth's home run.



Matt Kandle, an amateur photographer/videographer, provided footage of Ruth's 1932 home run. This footage survives today and provides some insight into Ruth's home run.

Kirk Kandle, Matt's grandson, grew up seeing footage of the home run through his family's home movies. Kandle says "I had seen it so many times. I'm sure he pointed at the fence. It never dawned on me that there were questions about Babe calling his shot. I never heard anything else other than the legend." After viewing the home run many times, Kandle believes that Ruth called the home run. He seems convinced that the story about the home run is true.


Kirk Kandle began contacting sports writers about the footage in 1975. He wanted to convince sports writers that Ruth did indeed call his own shot. He contacted Paul Borden in 1975; Robert Creamer of Sports Illustrated in 1976; and the Louisville Courier Journal in 1978. Kandle wanted sports writers to have access to the footage that he grew up with.

Additionally, Kirk Krandle recalled a conversation that he had with Earl Combs, a hall of fame outfielder with the Yankees. Combs, a teammate of Ruth's for many years including 1932, believed that Ruth called the home run.

Kirk Krandle made a key point to Sherman about the footage. Regarding the footage, Sherman says "Krandle did capture the two moments that likely show how the tale of the Called Shot was set into motion. The first produced the famous still of Ruth extending his arm and pointing. The pitch, a ball, dribbles past catcher Gabby Hartnett. This is a key point. Ruth starts to make his gesture here with Hartnett's back turned. The Cubs catcher steadfastly denied that Ruth called his shot, but we can see that he didn't see it all." If Hartnett's back is turned, how could he possibly know that Ruth did not call his shot? Perhaps, he could hear what Ruth said, but he could not tell in Ruth was pointing to the Cubs' dugout or the center field? If he was pointing to the pitcher or centerfield, then it's possible that he called his shot. Hartnett would not be able to conclusively say that Ruth did not call his shot.

Sherman says "Kirk and I watched replays of the Called Shot several times at slower speeds. Even then, it's hard to determine the exact nature of Ruth's gestures." The footage is inconclusive. Whether Ruth called his own shot or not remains uncertain.

Sherman points out that John Thorn, the current official historian of Major League Baseball, has the same opinion that Sherman has. Thorn cannot say conclusively whether or not Ruth called his own shot.

Sherman points out that Don Bell, of the "Village Voice", believes that Ruth did indeed call his shot. Bell says "The conclusion? After watching the film some 20 times at various speeds and stopping it at will, there's no doubt in my mind that Ruth actually called his shot four times. Twice in the first sequence, which was more of a general statement of intent than a prediction, and more definitely, more precisely, in the two cocking-the-gun-and-shooting gesture just before Root hurdle the ball." So, Bell actually believes that Ruth called his shot multiple times, not just once. Bell seems convinced about something that many are uncertain about. Nevertheless, Bell's opinion is interesting and unique.



Sherman asked many modern day baseball observers what they thought about Ruth's home run. Their opinions, like those of historians and latter day sports writers, differed from each other.

Bob Costas said "I never saw anything that was 100% percentage conclusive. There's no question he is doing something, and there is some bravado. I would infer from the bravado that he was saying 'I'll show you.' That's different from saying 'I'll show you, and I'm going to hit the next pitch into the center field bleachers.' We would like to believe that. We just don't have the evidence to back it up." So, Costas believes the evidence is lacking. Costs acknowledges Ruth's confidence, but not his possible prescience.

George Will suggests that Ruth did not call his own shot because he "never unequivocally said he did." So, Ruth's own ambivalence may suggest that the story was exaggerated. Will also says "If he had pointed to the center field seats, the pitch he was vowing to hit there would have hit him". Will points out that Root may have thrown at Ruth if he felt he was showing the pitcher up, which would have violated an unwritten rule of baseball. When a pitcher is shown up, he or his team will often retaliate by throwing at the hitter. As far as we know that did not happen.

Leigh Montville said "I don't think he called his own shot as if he was going to hit a homer to a specific spot. But he was pointing that he was going to hit the ball a long way. It was fortuitous the way it worked out." So, Montville believes that Ruth confidently stood up to the Cubs and their fans, but did predict his home run. Montville points out that Ruth "could be brought into confrontations easily throughout his career. He was always yelling and carrying on." Ruth had a loud and boisterous personality that lent itself to confrontations and arguments. He may simply have been arguing with the Cubs and their fans.

Baseball historian Bill Jenkinson says "It's the single most transcendent moment in baseball history. I believe he called his shot." Jenkins seems so certain that he sees the moment as not only noteworthy, but "transcendent." Jenkinson explains "The problem in believability is the issue of location. Nobody, including Ruth, could point to a spot and say 'I'm going to hit a home run there.' That was always the problem with the legend." However, Jenkins says that if people dismiss the idea that he predicted the location of his home run, then the story of the Called Shot is true. Jenkins says "I'm glad the research took me down this path. Previously, I had been a naysayer. But the data's there. It's overwhelming." Jenkinson has a website for his findings entitled BabeRuth1932.webs.com.

Tim Wiles, director of research for the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, was strongly influenced by a talk given by John Thorn, the official historian of Major League Baseball. Wiles says "John Thorn gave a talk here. He's very good with words. He said something like 'It doesn't matter whether Ruth called his shot. What matters is that we're still talking about it.' The fact that we are still talking about it indicates what sort of person Babe Ruth was, and that it is entirely plausible that he could have called his own shot. He had that outsized talent and personality to be able to do what he said he was going to do." Wiles suggests it's possible because of Ruth's talent and personality. It shows the respect that Ruth earned throughout his career.

Michael Gibbons, the Executive director of the Babe Ruth birthplace and museum, says that Ruth "orchestrated the whole thing. He took two called strikes to make it more dramatic. He challenged them, and he delivered. As he rounds the bases, he's clearly saying 'See I got you.' He called his shot through those gestures and the dynamic of the moment. I just don't think he called his location." Gibbons believes that Ruth intentionally made the moment more dramatic by taking a second strike. Like Jenkinson, he does not believe that Ruth pointed to the specific location of where he would hit the baseball. However, he believed that Ruth called his shot.

Tom Verducci, of Sports Illustrated, says "We've mapped the moon and the human genome. A little uncertainty, even mythology, is good for the soul in this age of hyper analytics. I don't know if Babe Ruth really called his home run in the 1932 World Series, and I'm okay with not knowing." Verducci is comfortable with the uncertainty. Perhaps the uncertainty adds drama and fun to the debate.

Verducci adds "Belieiving he called his shot - and Ruth seemed to encourage this belief as time went on, recognizing the value of the story- is more fun than believing he didn't." Verducci suggests that many people want to believe that Ruth called his shot. People may want to believe that a legendary figure did something legendary.

Buster Olney, of ESPN, says "I don't think Ruth called his own shot based on the moving images we have. If he was standing in the box and pointing toward the centerfield fence, as if to take note of something in the distance, I think he would've raised his hand and arm much higher." Olney seem skeptical that Ruth predicted his home run. However, Olney says "I have always loved the images of Ruth talking down the Cubs' bench as he rounds the bases." Even if he doubts that Ruth called his own shot, Olney respects the drama of the moment.

Sportswriter Roger Snell says " When you see it, even in slow motion, it's not conclusive...Ruth is yelling at the dugout. To me he's responding to the third base side." So, Snell thinks Ruth was responding to the Cubs dugout." Snell also questions why the debate has lingered so long. Snell says "Why it has lived so long is amazing to me. Hartnett and Root, who had their views, were as honest as can be, but so was Lou Gehrig. Why would he lie and say the opposite?" So, Snell believes that the opinions or Hartnett, Root and Gehrig should hold sway.

Jonathan Eig, author of a biography on Lou Gehrig, says "Gehrig was on the on deck circle. He was closer than anybody but the pitcher and catcher. He initially said it didn't happen. I always take the most credence in what somebody I initially says. As the myth began to grow, Gehrig went along with whatever everyone wanted to believe." Eig places confidence in Gehrig's initial response. Gehrig's initial reaction makes Eig skeptical that Ruth called his shot.

Phil Rogers, of the Chicago Tribune, downplays Ruth's gesture. He says " While we all love great stories, I side with Charlie Root on this one. I believe Ruth's gesture was far less grand than it has become over the passing of time. More than likely, he waved his bat at Root after a quick pitch or for some other minor crime." So, Rogers believes the act before the home run has been exaggerated over time. Maybe he believes that the story has been embellished through the years.

David Fletcher, the founder of the Chicago Baseball Museum, is also skeptical. Fletcher says " In essence, the Babe Ruth Called Shot is a wonderful fable, but that's all it is - a fable. Put in the context of time, Ruth "calling" his homer could not have happened." Fletcher believes that it did not happen because Ruth would not have wanted to show up the pitcher. Fletcher believes that "Ruth was the game's greatest-ever showman, but he adhered to the age-old code of the game." Even though Ruth was dramatic, Fletcher believes that Ruth would not have showed up an opponent. Fletcher believes that if Ruth called his own shot, Root would have retaliated presumably by throwing a pitch at him. There is no record that Root tried to hit Ruth with a pitch.



Sherman says "In order to appreciate the totality of the Called Shot, you have to view it from two perspectives: reality and myth. Objectively, sure, you could knock holes in the legend." These are the two elements of the Called Shot. There is this healthy tension between "reality" and "myth." These two elements exist side by side as the story gets passed on to future generations. The uncertainty of how much is true and how much is untrue actually creates drama and interest.

Sherman says "The home videos show do direct evidence of him making the dramatic gesture that some claim he made. Fans in the stands and people in the press box interpreted Ruth's waving as a destination call. Once he delivered and the reporters wrote about it, then of course he called his shot." The actual footage does not show Ruth predicting the home run. However, many in the crowd may have thought that he called the home run or that he predicted that he would hit a home run. The newspaper reports that people read the next day suggested that Ruth called his shot.

Sherman also points out that "Ruth's initial comments don't indicate that he pointed, In his heart of hearts, he knew you couldn't hit a baseball to a specific spot or in the distance." It may have been impossible to hit the ball to a predicted location. Even for a talented batter like Ruth, it may have been impossible to hit the ball precisely where he wanted to.

Sherman says "If Ruth had pointed, all of his teammates would have recalled him boasting about it immediately after the game. Never one for bashfulness, he wouldn't have kept his achievement quiet in the clubhouse. Ruth bough into the story only after hearing it repeated many times. If people wanted to believe it, who was he to spoil a good tale?" In other words, if Ruth definitely called his own shot, more of his teammates would have corroborated the achievement. Also, Ruth would have consistently bragged about the accomplishment considering his gregarious personality. Instead, Ruth probably liked how the story embellished his reputation as a player.

Additionally, Sherman says "Is the story as good if Goliath defeats David in five rounds? Hardly. We need to believe that our heroes are capable of defying imagination by performing superhuman feats of excellence at a time when we most want them to deliver. The Called Shot was that moment for Ruth."

The story of Babe Ruth's Called Shot has been passed on over time. The story involves fact, fiction, myth and a legendary figure. Some express skepticism, while others express belief. Still others appreciate the interesting blend of fact and fiction; accomplishment and myth; and the combination of first hand accounts and historical interpretations.

The story has many elements to it. That's part of what makes the story so memorable and interesting.

It's likely that Ruth made some sort of confident and predictive gesture without actually predicting the exact location of his home run. He was verbally sparing with the Cubs dugout and their fans the whole game. The gesture occurred within the context of that ongoing verbal exchange. So, Ruth was trying to make a point to the Cubs players and fans. He probably reminded them that he had only two strikes on him and that he still had one more strike to give. Although, it is possible that he boasted that he would hit the next pitch for a home run. However, it's unlikely he predicted where he would hit it.

The story will continue to be told. It will continue to appeal to baseball fans and observers.

In any event, it's one of the many stories that comprise the fabric of baseball history. In Shakespearean fashion, the question remains: Did he or didn't he? That is indeed the question.