Walter Johnson Vs. Christy Mathewson
 

Just wondering how these pitchers rank in your collecting world and do you have reasons for one being better than the other. Just looking for YOUR reason and showing some cards would be a great addition. To me these two were the 2 greatest pitchers from their era and would love to read your opinions on the subject.
Thanks

By WAR, Johnson is something like 50 points ahead of Mathewson, but a few behind Young. By JAWS, Johnson is a bit ahead of Young, and hugely ahead of Mathewson. Mathewson of course pitched for a much better team and had more success, but I don't see it as even close. Maybe you could argue Young is the GOAT, it wouldn't be insane, but I would say Johnson..

Tomi, how about you showing showing some of your WaJo and Matty cards to start things off?

I mainly collect vintage but love the pre war on this site. I will eventually transition into pre war also with Cobb and Ruth being at the top of my list but as of now vintage is my era. I'm only buying a few items per year so my collection increases very slowly. I have been following this site since I can remember but you guys and your collections are the reason why I will make the move. I honestly didn't appreciate the era until i got more into these forums. Unfortunately it will take a while but I will absolutely post as it happens.


Thanks

WaJo > Matty. 110 career shutouts speaks volumes. Plus, he lost 26 games by a score of 1-0. Johnson was just so dominate. Imagine if he had played for the Giants and not the Senators.

Johnson is almost undoubtedly the superior pitcher, but I have always been drawn in by the Mathewson mystique...he just raised the level of being a ballplayer to that of being almost respectable.

Also I got my first Johnson and Matty cards at the same time, within a group of five that were my first prewar cards. The Mathewson card just sparked my prewar fire more than the Johnson. If I had gotten Walter's T206 portrait, well, who knows how I would feel, though I have had a longstanding preference for action poses over portraits...

Brian

I would argue that saying Young is the GOAT would in fact be insane. He shouldn't even be in anyone's top 20.

WaJo was probably a little bit better than Mathewson though. But I think it's a little bit closer than most people probably do.

With apologies that I never get sick of posting these, they're tied if you are counting different m113 photos...

Johnson and Young have credible greatest of all-time arguments. Mathewson is pretty far behind by the numbers, but that's because he's compared to those two. I don't see any reasonable argument that Mathewson had a better career.

Two fine gentlemen.

https://photos.imageevent.com/kawika...4CJ%20WaJo.jpg https://photos.imageevent.com/kawika...J%20Matty1.jpg

Gotta go with Barney
 

Walter P. "Barney" Johnson. "The Big Train". Pitcher for the Washington Senators in 1907-1927. 417 wins and 34 saves in 21 MLB seasons. 1924 World Series champion. 1913 and 1924 AL Most Valuable Player. 3-time triple crown. 6-time AL wins leader. 5-time AL ERA leader. 12-time AL strikeout leader. He had a career ERA of 2.17 in 5,914.1 innings pitched. He pitched a no-hitter in 1920. He holds the MLB record with 110 career shutouts. MLB All-Time Team. Inducted to the MLB Hall of Fame in 1936. One of his best seasons was 1913 as he posted a record of 36-7 with a 1.14 ERA in 346 innings pitched.

Notebook cover...

I think Johnson was the better pitcher of the two; he maybe is the best of all time. Mathewson was very very good, but his fame is larger than what he did on the field. Beside playing most of his career in the country’s largest city, he was a very handsome, college-educated, respectable and pious ball player at a time when ball players were considered low-lifes and bums. He helped legitimize the image of the baseball player and grow the sport into America’s game (nothing against Wajo who was a very good person too). Matty was the all American boy who played ball (heck, he ultimately died from serving his country in the military). If I had to win a game, I take Johnson all day every day. If I wanted to sell tickets and build franchise value, I would probably choose Matty.

I think Walter Johnson was the greatest pitcher ever. And I think if you are talking about other pitchers from the era, you have to include Grover Cleveland Alexander and Cy Young in the discussion in addition to Mathewson. Lefty Grove was probably the best early live-ball pitcher.

Johnson was dominant on so many levels:

-His 110 shutouts is the most ever (followed by Alexander at 90)

-He has the record for most seasons leading his League in strikeouts with 12 including 8 consecutive from 1912 through 1919 (Nolan Ryan had 11 titles). When he eclipsed 3,000 strikeouts in 1923, only five other pitchers had as many as 2,000 to their name. It would be 51 years before St. Louis Cardinals right-hander Bob Gibson became the second member of the 3,000 strikeout club.

-He had a 55 2/3rd scoreless streak in 1913 that remained the record for 55 years (Drysdale broke it).

-He was a very accurate pitcher, leading the league in fewest walks per nine innings twice and strikeouts to walk ratio 9 times (this may be a record).

-His 5 ERA titles is tied for the 3rd most ever with Mathewson and others (Lefty Grove had 9).

-His 1913 season may have been the best ever. Johnson had 36 wins (no on has had as many since) to only 7 losses (.837 winning %). He also led the League in ERA (1.14), Shutouts (11), strikeouts (243), Innings Pitched (346), Complete games (29), and every advanced metric (ERA+ of 259, FIP of 1.9, WHIP of .78, etc.). Opponents hit .187 off him, and he only walked 38 players (leading the league in walks per 9 innings). His 16.5 WAR (15.1 as a pitcher) has not been touched since.

As Hank Thomas points out in his amazing biography of the Big Train, Johnson was called in to pitch at the demands of the 1,000 cavalry soldiers attending the Nationals last game of the year in 1913, which in their annual tradition was an uncompetitive "joke game". His catcher hadn't played since a previous joke game a decade ago, and Johnson was touched for 2 hits after lobbing pitches over and then going back to centerfield, where he had been playing. The following pitcher let in both of Johnson's runners. Had it not been for that joke game, Johnson would have had a 1.09 ERA on the season, which would have been lower than Bob Gibson's 1.12 ERA, the modern major league record for a starter.

During his time, it was widely regarded that Walter Johnson was the greatest pitcher ever.

Although Mathewson received more votes in the inaugural Hall of Fame class (205 votes to Johnson's 181), I think a lot of that had to do with sentiment towards Mathewson because of his early death.

Both Mathewson and Johnson were excellent people and greatly respected by their fellow players. Both were also extremely popular with fans. When Washington traveled, Johnson was a major attendance draw, and fans in other Cities often cheered for Johnson against their own team.

I stumbled across this author and sportswriter John Kieran quote in one of my books:


"Mathewson was the best pitcher I ever saw. He was the best anyone ever saw. Let them name all the others. I don't care. Mathewson was better."

ERA Matty 2.13 WaJo 2.17
FIP Matty 2.26 WaJo 2.38
WHIP Matty 1.058 WaJo 1.061
Wins WaJo 417 Matty 373
ShO WaJo 110 Matty 79 + 4 WS
Ks WaJo 3509 Matty 2507
ERA+ WaJo 147 Matty 136

Postseason
ERA Matty 0.97 WaJo 2.52
WHIP Matty 0.836 WaJo 1.42

Hall of Fame Vote
Matty 90.7%
WaJo 83.6%

I give Johnson a slight advantage, but Mathewson's postseason dominance, especially his 3 shutouts in the 1905 World Series make it close.

Probably not real, but there's an anecdote about a hitter going down against Johnson on three straight called strikes, and complaining to the umpire that the third one sounded low.

In what world was Cy Young a better pitcher than Christy Mathewson? I really don't get that argument.

And if the word "Wins" makes its way across your keyboard while forming your argument, then you should have your keyboard taken away from you.

Brian, are you suggesting that Johnson wasn't "almost respectable?" :)

Wait, hold the presses...Peter, weren't you the one leading the argument that, back in the Mathewson - Johnson era, pitchers were throwing the equivalent of peewee baseball today? 75 mph isn't going to make any sound at all. And if that's the case, how then did "The Big Train" get that nickname?

Matty had the good fortune to start his career earlier so that he could claim the "almost respectable" crown before Johnson could clutch it in his greedy, elongated fingers.

Brian (I am not an anti-Johnsonite)

I never said 75. I doubt it was consistently in the 90s either. No reason to think baseball is the exception to the rule that human performance has greatly improved over the last 100 years. And there is no doubt that in the context of his day, which is what counts, he was very fast.

I continue to believe, and will go to my deathbed believing, that they threw in the high 80s and up into the 90s consistently. Some few, like Johnson and Feller broke 100. I don't believe there is much difference between them and now, except there were way more minor leagues back then, and fewer pitchers at the MLB level. I don't give one hoot about the hyped up human performance of today. The ballplayers of that era were way more loose and carefree, and their diets, exercise and habits were way different than today, and that translates into the money and business of baseball today affecting human performance. I believe the pitching the pitching was better than you think. I'm 65. Just a few years ago I could hit 80 or 85 mph. If I could do it, there's no chance they were throwing watermelons at hitters at the MLB level back then. We've been all through this. You know I won't change in this.

Johnson was clocked at 91.36 mph by Remington Arms in 1917. This was measured at some distance from the actual release, but I haven't seen an account that gives the actual distance from release. If it was different from the point it is measured today, things would need to be scaled to make them align. While not radar, the arms world could and did measure pretty accurately the speeds of moving objects, which is one reason a whole lot of things changed in that world before modern testing methods became available.

It seems pretty clear that pitchers back then threw hard as well, not quite as hard as today, and likely less frequently as they had to hurl 350+ innings and surely conserved their arms unlike todays pitchers that go all out 100% of the time because there's 12 relievers to come in and they have little responsibility for any great length of time.

Source: https://www.mlb.com/news/lindsay-ber...ed/c-119564372
'Fastball' searches for the game's all-time top speed
Documentary uses physics to help calculate which heater stands alone as No. 1

By Lindsay Berra:
April 21, 2015

NEW YORK -- It's a question every baseball fan has asked, an argument every baseball fan has had: Who threw the hardest ever?

Thomas Tull, head of Legendary Pictures and producer of "42," and Johnathan Hock, eight-time Emmy Award-winning producer, director, writer and editor, are no different than any other baseball fans.

Their new baseball documentary "Fastball," which premiered Monday night at the Tribeca Film Festival in New York City, made an attempt to answer that question.

"Thomas wanted to put a stake in the ground and say, 'This was the fastest pitcher ever,'" says Hock, the film's director. "We went through a lot of effort to try to figure it out."

"Fastball" walks the delicate line between the mythology and the science of the fastball, drawing on both anecdotal and empirical evidence.

Video: Director Jonathan Hock, fans share favorite moments

Quite a few remarkable anecdotes come from the 20 Hall of Famers Hock interviewed for "Fastball." They include notable pitching masters Nolan Ryan, Bob Gibson and Goose Gossage, along with current flamethrowers Justin Verlander, Craig Kimbrel and David Price.

On the flip side, "Fastball" also includes Hall of Fame hitters Joe Morgan, Johnny Bench, Tony Gwynn, George Brett and Mike Schmidt, along with current stars Andrew McCutchen, Bryce Harper and Brandon Phillips, who share their opinions on the hardest-throwing pitchers of all-time.

But Hock wanted more than just stories.

"We felt in this subject, the fastball, God was in the details, not just in the mythology," Hock says. "We felt we had to understand what was going on with the atom before we could understand the whole universe."

The record book is clear. Cincinnati pitcher Aroldis Chapman's fastball to Tony Gwynn, Jr. in the eighth inning of a Sept. 25th, 2010, game between the Reds and Padres registered 105.1 mph on the radar gun, the highest ever.

But radar guns are a relatively new invention, and most of the early entries into the who-was-the-fastest-ever argument never had the chance to be clocked using modern methods.

"Fastball" presents Walter Johnson, Bob Feller, Ryan and Chapman as the four pitchers who have carried the banner of hardest thrower in their respective baseball eras. Fortunately, Johnson, Feller and Ryan were all timed in a very accurate way.

In 1917, Johnson's fastball was tested in a Bridgeport, Conn., munitions laboratory at 122 feet per second, which converts to 83.2 mph. Feller's fastball was measured on the field in the late 1940s using Army equipment designed to measure artillery shell velocity. He clocked in at 98.6. And Ryan was clocked at 100.9 mph on Aug. 20, 1974, against the Tigers, when ABC's Monday Night Baseball first used a radar gun in a game.

But the speed of Johnson's fastball was measured after it would have crossed home plate. Feller's was measured at home plate. And Ryan's was measured approximately 10 feet in front of home plate. Today's MLB standard, the one by which Chapman was judged, is to use pitch speed measured at 50 feet from home plate.

"Johnson, Feller and Ryan were all timed in a very accurate way by reliable means, but the tests were very different from one another, based on where the ball was clocked," Hock said. "We had the opportunity to take these apples-to-oranges comparisons and make them apples-to-apples with the help of some brilliant physicists from Carnegie Mellon University."

Gregg Franklin, head of the physics department at Carnegie Mellon, made calculations to adjust for the different locations of each pitch measurement, taking into account the fact that a baseball loses approximately one mph per five feet after it is pitched. The new numbers show Ryan in the lead at 108.5 mph, followed by Feller at 107.6 and Johnson at 93.8.

"Anecdotally, and based on his performance, you have to think Johnson was throwing harder than that," Franklin says. "So is this definitive? I don't know. I don't think we'll ever really know who threw the hardest, but it's a lot closer than the original numbers suggest."

Hock agrees.

"What's great about this is that we have this answer, and we can still have the argument 10 seconds later," he says. "And we will, because that's baseball. It's half what happens on the field and half what happens inside of us when we watch something beautiful, or when we just want to have a mallet-headed argument about who threw faster. And baseball is just really, really good for both of those things."

And so is "Fastball."

Lindsay Berra is a columnist for MLB.com.

https://securea.mlb.com/assets/image...9_b6hbaa9k.jpg

Numerous sources give the 83 as in post 25 and also the 91 in post 24. Not clear if the 91 is a converted figure to reflect the range, or which is really right.


I found this from the NRA's records. 122fps = 83.18, but at a distance that is not specified. The distance is the key to whether 83 is fast or not; the picture appears to place this at quite some distance.

Mathewson was great, but Johnson was the best pitcher in MLB history -- and if not for Babe Ruth, I'd say the greatest player in MLB history, so not really a close call between WaJo and Matty.

Greedy?

I think it should be taken into consideration that Matty's great 3 shutout WS performance happened in 1905, near the beginning of his career, and Walter's WS opportunities were in 1924-25, at the tail end of his career.

Early days, clearly Young.

1901-1925 I put Walter at the top, without question, then Alexander, then Matty. Alex pitched in a tiny ballpark for a generally weak team. Matty pitched in the Polo Grounds for a powerhouse. Both won 373 games.

Grove, Spahn, and others come into the conversation later.

Sorry Hank, just playing around with words, as is my wont. All I have read indicates that Walter Johnson was the definition of a fine, stand-up fellow. Christy just had the advantage of establishing his sterling reputation prior to Walter.

Perhaps it was Christy that had greedy fingers (hopefully no Mathewson relatives on here). If so, those fingers were greedy to pitch more innings, just like Walter's.

Brian

As Hank Thomas points out in his biography of Walter Johnson, the apparatus Johnson and Nap Rucker had to throw through at the Remington Arm's bullet-testing range in Connecticut was at "shoulder height to measure bullets fired from a standing position and Johnson couldn't get his sidearm throws to go straight through the plate. "At length, however" it was reported, "after some effort and with a consequent loss in speed in an attempt to place the ball accurately, "the sphere was successfully hurled in the proper direction, broke one of the fine wires in transit and collided with a heavy thud against the steel plate." Johnson's best throw clocked at 122 feet per second (82 m.p.h), Rucker's at 113, both on their third and last tries. Despite the flawed procedure, it does allow for some comparison. In June 1933, Van Lingle Mungo of the Dodgers and Lefty Gomez of the Yankees, two of the fastest pitchers of their era, were tested at West Point's department of ballistics and mathematics, presumably with more sophisticated equipment. Mungo registered 113 feet per second and Gomez 111 on their best throws."

Given that Walter Johnson was unable to use his natural motion during the speed test in Bridgeport, Connecticut, I don't think it is a reliable gauge of the Big Train's actual speed.

Don't take it from me:
 

A week before the (1924) World Series, syndicated columnist and future American icon Will Rogers, who ranched about 40 miles from the Johnson family spread in Coffeyville, Kansas, wrote that if Walter Johnson had played for John McGraw's New York Giants all those years, he would have had to be incompetent to have lost even a single game. Johnson, Rogers declared, could be sure that he caried more good wishes than any man, let alone athlete, who'd ever entered any competition in the entire history of America. After a "diligent search" of 150 years, Rogers wrote, Washington had finally found an honest man.

For their sheer beauty, here are the words formulated by Bill Corum, as they appeared in the New York Times the following morning (after Game 7 of the 1924 World Series): To the victor belong the spoils. When future generations are told about this game they will not hear about Barnes, or Frisch, or Kelly, or even about Harris or McNeely. But the boy with his first glove and ball crowding up to his father's knee will beg: "Tell me about Walter Johnson."

Wow...just WOW!!!

-
Love and collect both Matty and Johnson, can't go wrong with either one of them and both outstanding humans.
-

Walter beats out Mathewson, but it's not exactly a mauling. Walter had a longer career so is pretty far ahead of him in counting stats. Gets much closer when you compare 7 year primes. Walter still edges him.

If you really need a tiebreaker, "The Big Train" was the superior hitter. It was an outlier, but Johnson hit an incredible .433 in 107 plate appearances during the 1925 season.

Christy wasn't completely useless at bat (for a pitcher), but Walter was much better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wo-5eo2xBRY

How about Walter Johnson as a play-by-play announcer for the Washington Senators vs the Cleveland Indians, last game of the season in 1939 on radio station WJSV.

This.

Wajo v. Matty
 

With all due respect to the great Matty, I think this guy is probably the GOAT.

Attachment 611811

He was measured at 122 ft/sec, which is 83 mph. That measurement was taken 7 ft behind home plate. Adjusting for where pitches get recorded today, just a few feet from release, estimates put his velocity in the low 90s. Johnson likely topped out around 95mph.

I have to respond. Think what you will of me, I don't care. It would seem that I am the only one in this thread who played real no-shit baseball at a competitive level. I don't know if you folks, who I very highly respect when it comes to all the nuances of baseball cards, realize what you're saying, but you don't know jack about the game itself. Yes, players at the MLB level are bigger, stronger, faster today. And they break down with incredible regularity, protecting their $$$. But. I've played the game. I know all about 85 to 90 mph fastballs. I could hit them pretty well, if I guessed right. I know that there is a WORLD of difference between 85 to 90 to 95 and 95 to 100. Above 95, you will hear the baseball, whizzing. You won't catch up to it, unless you're something special, even if you know it's coming. If you think Walter Johnson topped out at 95 mph, you're delusional. If that was the case, and if I could somehow go back in time, you'd be collecting MY t205 an t206 cards today! I don't give a flying f what idiotic facts you're reading. They're wrong. They called him "The Big Train" because his fastball, when he put on the gas, made noise. I'm done with listening to this goofy, armchair nonsense.

Appeals to authority and insulting everyone as idiots does not make a case, evidence does :)

Greatest player from Kansas.

James - curious to what extent the ball has changed over the years, and whether those changes might make a difference. For example, nowadays they toss out a ball after it hits the dirt. My understanding is that 100 years ago, they would use a ball for much longer. With a little wear, would a ball start to make noise at a lower velocity? For that matter, would a ball with a few more imperfections end up being a bit less aerodynamic, and so therefore might be slowed down by a bit more drag?

I respect your opinion, and I understand why you feel that way. I just disagree wholeheartedly. I would wager every penny I'll ever earn and my daughter's inheritance that Walter Johnson, or any of his contemporaries, never touched 100 mph. That's how confident I am. Not a snowball's chance in hell. I'd even go one step further and say that Walter Johnson was the only pitcher of his time who could even touch 90.

I forget who it was, but there's a video out there of a pitching scout/coach that works with MLB pitchers to add velocity to their fastballs. He looks at their mechanics and makes minor adjustment after minor adjustment to add mph to their arms. This knowledge has worked its way down the system over the years, and now minor league guys and highschool arms are learning how to contort their bodies to attain maximum velocity. Hip flexor workouts, oblique exercises, deep lunges launching off the mound, wrist movements, angle of approach, it all adds up. Not to mention guys are just bigger and stronger today. But this guy was commenting on some old black and white footage of early HOFers and was asked how many mph he thought he could add to their fastballs based on their mechanics, and the guy literally started laughing and then said, "I don't know. A lot. 10-15? Maybe more probably." For whatever that's worth, I believe him. When I watch old footage, it really is hilarious watching these guys "pitch". There's just no way in hell those guys were throwing real heat. Not with those mechanics, and not when they're out there night after night pitching complete game after complete game. Remember, these guys were a decade removed from when the hitters could still request where they wanted the ball to be thrown. Half of these pitchers were just out there playing catch. The game was played on the base paths. It just wasn't even remotely the same game as today.

Thought this was an interesting video showing WaJo's mechanics.

His long arms were like whips--even in slow motion, he looks fast:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26bCah5DZAo

1 pitch velocity
2 contemporaries

1. OK... we aren't going to know, we will argue with our biases and perceptions. I think Walter Johnson and Smokey Joe Wood could pitch in the 90s. I think Matty could pitch in the 90s, IF he chose to do so. (I think he pitched to win games, not to dominate hitters.) I also think that they could pitch today and shut down modern hitters who do have some success against modern pitchers who are throwing in the high 90s. I think that Padres pitcher, Randy Jones, could shut down some modern hitters with that stuff he threw in the low 80s, unhittable stuff. Pitch velocity in not the sole indicator of pitching success. Among other factors, the ability to deceptively change speeds, is something that can make a difference.

2. More importantly, Johnson and Mathewson weren't exactly contemporaries. But there was some overlap. Matty was 7 years older and died 21 years earlier than Johnson. But think about the league they pitched against. Matty started pitching in 1900, pitching with his arm and his brain, 1914 was his last significantly effective season. Walter's first effective season was 1910, and his last 20 win season was 1925.

Ten years doesn't seem like much... but golly, what happened to the game during that time? In 1900 the balls stay in the game forever, foul balls being retrieved out of stands, brown with dirt and tobacco stains, soft... but midway into Walter's career he's throwing better baseballs, lively baseballs, but now against batters that are using slightly shorter bats with bigger diameter barrels and thinner handles. Bat physics changed drastically. The bats Babe Ruth used as a Yankee slugger would occasionally break. The bats Hans Wagner used would last a season or two. Most of Matty's games were pitched with the turn of the century. Walter's pitching is primarily with the lively clean baseballs and "slugger" bats. Walter pitched in over 100 more games.

From our perspective, without being a student of baseball history, it is easy for us to think of Walter and Matty as spot on contemporaries; after all, both are in T206 and Cracker Jacks. But they aren't.

Hmmm... who can throw heat now? I don't know, pick half a dozen of them. Put them on trains, crap lodging and diets, less adequate health care, no air conditioning, and then see how well they pitch.

I don't think any of us could now hit any of those guys. I think Walter had the better fast ball. I think they both coasted through their games at times, bearing down when necessary (something that would not be tolerated in this time of distinguishing pitches as either competitive or non-competitive). Walter and Matty pitched so as to start and finish the game. That was expected, 115 years ago. Nowadays, you seldom need a second hand to count a pitcher's complete games in a season with your fingers.

Who here associates something with the number 1.12? If that doesn't, how about 1.12 ERA??? Now you're thinking Bob Gibson's 1968 season. I'm a Cardinals fan, and saw Gibson pitch several times, including game 7 of the 1964 World Series. As much of a fan as I am of Mr. Gibson, I'm aware that Walter's 1913 ERA of 1.14 would have been less than Bob Gibson's, IF he had been throwing his best stuff at the end of the 1913 season. The Athletics had clenched the pennant in 1913, Walter pitched in a game where he grooved a few pitches for some of his friends, on the opposing team, the game was a light-hearted affair for both teams, I think a coach or two may have gotten an at bat. It could have been the last game of the season, Washington won, about everyone pitched, Walter gave up 2 runs recording 0 outs in a late inning. You can read about it in "Baseball's Big Train," by Henry Thomas, a gentleman who knows a right smart about baseball. A singularly knowledgeable baseball scholar. If you haven't acquired a copy of that book and read it, you should stop reading this and order a copy of that book. Back to Bob Gibson, what he did on the mound in 1968 was powerful. But he'd have fallen a point or two short of surpassing what Walter did in 1913, IF Walter had either been competitive, or simply stayed out of that game that was a fun time for the players.

If you think Walter could only muscle up to about 90, fine. I think he could throw significantly harder, approaching 100, if he wanted. But for not wanting to hit anyone with a pitch, I'd think he could put a 90 mph fastball in your ribs, and then put a 100 mph pitch in your side, a rib or two lower, and then you could tell us which one felt faster.

Wajo>cm.

Well, first, I bow down to your obvious superiority. You played baseball so clearly you are the expert.

However, I don't think you ever made baseball's Hall of Fame, so I will defer to an even higher level of authority: HOF pitcher, broadcaster, and longtime student of the game, Jim Kaat. On page 123 of his book, "Still Pitching", he says of Whitey Ford:

"A year later I hooked up with Ford again, this time in Minnesota, where the bullpens were side by side, separated by a chain-link fence. You were so close you could practically reach across and shake hands with the guy you were pitching against. We're warming up and I could hear Whitey's fastball - "...whirrrrrr..." - it had that spin on it.

Sorry, but until you make the Hall of Fame, Kaat remains a higher authority than you, and he bears witness to the fact little junk ball pitcher Whitey Ford could also throw fastballs that "made noise." Above, you say a fastball achieves "noise" at and above 95 mph. Are you saying Ford threw that hard?

Whitey was also known for scuffing up baseballs, but that was standard fare in the days of Walt and Chris, Walter himself may not have doctored balls, but his catchers, infielders, or members of the opposing teams often did, plus the normal wear of baseballs that remained in play until they were lost in the stands.

And, by the way, one of Matty's nicknames was "Big 6." Also a reference to a train.

Longevity...
Popularity...
Dominance...

Historically Equaling the Promotions of Their Collectables!*

Unfortunately I don't Presently Own Mr Johnson Cards...
Sumthin' I Need to Remedy :)