Weezer
VolNation Dalai Lama , VN Most Beloved Poster
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2009
- Messages
- 91,302
- Likes
- 272,594
Jack may be better, but I’m not sure what your point is. The majority of the repeat wins are also some of the biggest tournaments on tour outside the majors. It’s not like he was cherry picking which tournaments had soft fields and was only playing those to pad his stats. He was winning the biggest tournaments that just so happened to be on the same course year after year.Nobody says he has not been a great golfer, the best of his era. He's just not the goat.
Your statement is flawed. His performances in the majors is great. Now admit, that he won the Firestone/Bridgestone on the same course 8 times, the Arnold Palmer Invitational on the same course 8 times, the Farmers Insurance played at Torrey Pines 7 times plus the US. Open, the WGC-AmEx/Cadillac/Mexico with a 72 players limited international (weaker field) field 7 times, Masters 5 times, BMW (Former Western Open) 5 times at Cog Hill, and Jack's Memorial Tournament on the same course 5 times. That total alone is 46 wins - more than half of his 82 total on the same courses or in the case of the WGC with a very limited field.
There are good reasons all real golfers understand the term, "horses for courses". Tiger maximized his damage on a handful of courses and good for him. Smart decisions. Jack played them all and other than the Masters did not win a single tournament more than 4 times on the same course. The WGC did not even exist when Jack played.
Just like his homerun record is a farce, so is his record for walks. Look at his stats from his Pittsburgh years and tell me had he never obsessively roided like he did he wouldn't have sniffed that record either.IMO I hope none of the roiders ever sniff the HOF.I think plenty of guys could challenge for best hitter of all time. Interesting enough, Barry didn't even reach 3000 hits, but conversely, IIRC, he's the all time walks leader. But there have been plenty of guys with more hits, and better lifetime batting averages.
Because their positive tests were anonymous. Deal the players union struck. Astros fired the GM and manager. Players were PART of an organized scheme. Not the organizers themselves. Prolly deserved a ban but it won’t help them in any HOF candidacy if that helps your indignant state.Why weren't the steroid abusers banned from baseball outright like Pete? Why weren't the Astros players that cheated even punished?
It is a cool town. I hope it survives this. Alot of that economy is tourism. So you're in south St. Augustine. We need to find a joint to watch these Vol games that @Catbone wont chicken out from.
I'd be down st Augustine is one of my all time fav cities. So when I watch any Tennessee bball or football game my face turns beet red the ENTIRE TIME no matter if we are winning or losing and I get very very quiet in person. I don't ever scream or yell. Instead I just come on here and complain....
I used to yell. I really redded out at the 2010 Music City Bowl and calmed down majorly after that. So I basically just do the same thing -- complain here where it's safe.I'd be down st Augustine is one of my all time fav cities. So when I watch any Tennessee bball or football game my face turns beet red the ENTIRE TIME no matter if we are winning or losing and I get very very quiet in person. I don't ever scream or yell. Instead I just come on here and complain....
I will just respectfully disagree. There's no way we can ever know if he bet against his team. He has not expressed much regret and he was rude to my grandmother in a grocery store. Your points are well crafted. I'm not changing my mind. Keep him out.I don't think Pete was a cheat. He absolutely broke the rules of baseball, but I don't recall there ever being proof he bet against himself, and I find it hard to believe he would have. Anyone who watched Pete play could see how serious he took the game. He played with everything he had at all times. And I think his own arrogance and just belief in himself would have prevented him from ever throwing a game. I think that same arrogance and belief in himself is what led to him gambling on baseball to begin with.
And I do think he should be in the Hall of Fame. The HoF is about career, not character, and Pete's career is absolutely Hall of Fame worthy. Plenty of the guys enshrined have questionable character.
According to reports, it was some of the Astros players who came up with the scheme, so apparently some of the players were the organizers. If the Roid players can be considered for the Hall, Pete should get the same consideration. Let the voters decide.Because their positive tests were anonymous. Deal the players union struck. Astros fired the GM and manager. Players were PART of an organized scheme. Not the organizers themselves. Prolly deserved a ban but it won’t help them in any HOF candidacy if that helps your indignant state.
I'd have to meet your grandmother before I can give this post a proper response. If she's as crotchety as Butchna….I will just respectfully disagree. There's no way we can ever know if he bet against his team. He has not expressed much regret and he was rude to my grandmother in a grocery store. Your points are well crafted. I'm not changing my mind. Keep him out.
Well said.McGwire and Sosa did get the ball rolling for Bonds on the cheating...none get a pass. It’s one thing to cheat to improve your performance in order to HOLD ON to a MLB career. Still no pass but understandable. When you use artificial means to bump up elite skills in order to reach and surpass hallowed records, then you deserve the requisite repercussions. Brady Anderson using the juice to become a one time 50 hr hitter when his previous max in the preceding 8 seasons was 21 is dubious. Bonds using the juice in an already established HOF career to best Maris and Ruth’s single season marks (I don’t count McGwire and Sosa) and then Aaron’s career total, is a travesty. We know when he ramped up the PED’s in response to the two others, but I trace it back to his first season with the Giants. 46 in that first season when his previous high was 34 the last season with the Pirates. He simply didn’t go all-in until he saw the national attention and glory involved with that stat. I think the writers who are barring his HOF entry will eventually die off and the new guard will vote him in...but I’m glad his punk azz has to wait.
And herein lies the problem. That question will always be there because he bet on games he was involved in.Hmm.. Just did a quick google, and from what I read, they don't have evidence he ever bet against himself. He bet on games he was in, but there's no indication he bet against himself or threw games.
Did you read the article? The fact that he didn't bet on certain games tipped gamblers off that he didn't like his chances. He could have saved pitchers in a close game he did not bet on in order to use them the next night when he was going to bet.That's an opinion piece. Read this article from ESPN, which involved Dowd, who investigated the case for MLB. It says that Rose bet on Reds games but there is no evidence he bet against them. And why would a bookie accept bets against the Reds knowing Rose could very easily influence the outcome? Makes no sense.
OTL: Notebook shows Rose bet on MLB as player