[Archive]

Posted By: Kevin Cummings

Still no verdict, but a few more tidbits from the author:

"...Talked to a baseball expert today, and he said I probably got the info out of a Bert Sugar book, who is not the foremost of authoritries. Am going to try to run his game down today.....Still checking Roach, because I want it right. Will change it to something like this---that a fourth is believed to have switch-pitched, but it cannot be corroborated at this date......Last word on this. Checked three of the four known ambidextrous games, and only Icebox Chamberlain's game had a specific reference to the switch-pitching on this particular news account.....Two of those games were in Chicago, where I checked the Tribune. Surely, they would have recorded that fact.....Believe the games happen as they say, but I think you would agree that late 19th-century boxscores are not exactly a fountain of invincibility. I learned long ago about the Courier-Journal to trust nothing, and to check it all. Nemec taught me that...."

If I read between the lines, it would seem that he's saying that while he does not (yet) have substantiating evidence, that does not mean it did not happen. I guess it all boils down to which philosophy you ascribe - "guilty until proven inncocent" or "innocent until proven guilty."