Ty Cobb not the monster many have made him out to be?
 

http://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/who-wa...w-thats-wrong/

Interesting article about the many myths of Ty Cobb.

We had a thread a couple of months ago about Leerhsen's bio of Cobb and Tim Hornbaker's, which came out at the same time. The discussion was spirited and interesting, including some back and forth about why Sam Crawford hated Cobb so much, and lots more:

http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=217919

Cobb was very misunderstood.

Ehhhh here we are lads:

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=217919

Thanks for posting this, its a great read. Makes me like Cobb even more.

The book is a great read, eliminating a lot of the BS found in the movie.

Regards,

Larry

Al Stump wrote a book that makes Cobb look like a psychopath. 90% lies. The movie is ridiculous, but entertaining. I believe Cobb was a racist and a difficult person to get along with, but he wasn't Satan! That book is such bullshit. He didn't rave at people and shoot his pistol in the hospital. A nurse who took care of him in his final days denies that. He was actually a model patient and signed baseballs for her. He gave to charities and gave money to former ball players down on their luck. He was a conflicted person, but no monster!

I think Cobb was hyper competitive and never made a point to be one of the good ole boys. He was a southerner which immediately made him an outsider and he like most southerners made it personal. Was he a racist? Who wasn't in that era? They were all bigots in one form or fashion. They hated the Irish, the Chinese and any other minority that didn't fit into the mold.

I think that he did everything in absolutes, no grey areas and that is how it is. As a kid I had the movie on VHS and I watched it over and over. It's how I learned who Tris Speaker, Nap Lajoie and Mickey Cochrene were. Stump lied his a$$ off to make a small fortune off of someone else's name and unfortunately it stuck.

When you talk about being hyper competitive I think about Kobe Bryant. A lot of people don't like Kobe but he took the game serious and so did Cobb. Being the best does not always equal being loved. As a fan of sports I would take a Kobe or Cobb over anyone because you know they are finishers and they have a killer instinct that you cant coach.

I don't like Kobe because he's a rapist ahole. His hyper-competitive nature has nothing to do with it. Michael Jordan was the most competitive basketball player I've ever seen. He beat my Bucks like a drum, and it never bothered me one bit. Kobe is a scum bag, and I'd happily say it to his face.

Heard rumors that the reason Jordan left the NBA was to avoid gambling allegations. Serve a multi-year suspension or make it appear as if your focus is elsewhere. Saves face for both Jordan and the NBA.

Also ironic is that his father was found murdered around this time.

Kobe is an excellent example. I look at Ted Williams the same way too.

and he would beat you like a rented mule.

Didn't he beat up a crippled heckler?

So he was basically Ron Artest, but with a crippled veteran.

Just curious. Did you read Leerhsens' book or at least the article referenced by the OP?

There was only 2 people there so nobody except them know what really happened. Ultimately she took a payoff and Kobe was never found guilty of anything. Should he of been convicted? Maybe. Did she lie for a payoff? Maybe. Only they know the truth, either way it wasn't anything money couldn't solve, at least in their minds. I respect Kobe as a player, I don't like athletes for their personalities. We like athletes for their ability. People like Greg Hardy who are true scumbags and don't care what anyone thinks shouldn't be allowed to play sports and make millions.

-James Steele

+1...Stump was a monster crook. Look at how many bogus Cobb balls and other autographs he put into the hobby....Also, Cobb financially took care of a lot of people including HOFer Mickey Cochrane. He also donated tons of money locally in Royston, Ga. for many things including little league baseball fields and hospitals...Yes, he was tough to get a long with, but he also had a big heart when spending money with people he really cared about...

I have no doubt Leerhsen tried to be accurate and honest with his book but is awfully hard to give much credibility to a baseball author who would write nonsense like this: "another time turned a tap back to the pitcher into an inside-the-park home run". I mean, c'mon.

And I'd sue him for every penny he's worth.

So you would happily call a man a scumbag to his face and if he retaliates you would sue him? Gotta say if your man enough to run your mouth off you have to take what comes from it.

Back to the task at hand. There are countless talented people who seem to put the game, work or whatever else over personal relationships with others. It's not uncommon. What is uncommon is the fact that Cobb was so talented and stood above all others during the dead all era that no one received nearly the amount of scrutiny that has and does. Compare his list of books to any other and you will find him to be the most investigated player during the Pre-War Era not named Ruth.

I wouldn't walk up to the guy and start hurling insults at him. I'm not a confrontational person. But, if he were close bye, and somebody asked my opinion of Bryant, I'd give it. If he chooses to resort to violence, then he'd get what's coming to him.

Ruth
 

Babe Ruth was no perfect dude - married but had mistresses. And probably even a child or two from mistresses- I think he adopted one. Late night partying with games the next day. How responsible is that? Ahh, can't be, we all love Ruth, right! Sometimes easy to sweep aside certain things with certain people, and hammer other dudes.

+ 1,000,000

He also played in New York and was jovial. Being successful in New York makes up for a plethora of sins. That's not intended as a slight to the Big Apple just a testament to how much they love their baseball. Let's not even start on The Mick and his foibles. Point being Cobb is misunderstood

Yeah, it doesn't refute him beating up some cripple. Actually it added maybe five more people that Cobb beat up in his lifetime. So like, Ron Artest, plus maybe a LeSsan McCoy nightclub brawl with potentially a Ray Rice.

Leo Durocher sure doesn't seem to speak too highly of Cobb, and check out the still in the vid shortly after he says that.:eek:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfcW7yYFhqk

Ooooh, Cobb talked some smack to a rookie. The horror!

As for that still image, the catcher in question actually defended Cobb, said he was going for the ball - and got it.

Leo had one run in as a Rookie which is nothing.. I mean Ruth sawed his bat in half because he didn't want Bushers to hit. Both sound rough but not out of bounds.

Seriously?

Would that be acceptable in today's game? Not likely, but I know things were different then.

I personally have no idea, one way or another, if the horror stories we were told about Cobb are true, but when you hear from past ball players speak about him, I think they carry some merit about what they say.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dh_kerKBBMw

Not sure how long this story, the good and bad about Cobb, has been going on, but I think like any rumor/tale/story, it will be debated to death with no real conclusion ever to be found.

Again, nothing much in that clip about Cobb being awful other than repeating the falsehood about the sharpened spikes.

Nothing is accepted in today's game anymore. They're turning it into a game for fairies.

The Utley rule at second base the Posey rule at home. These guys now make MILLIONS $$ they know full well what they're signing up for and with those MILLIONS they can afford doctors (although they're provided by the teams now) let alone how it was. Players didn't make anything compared to now and had no benefits. The richer the players get the more pampered they get and for some reason unknown to me, a wide variety of people embrace it.

Flag Football.

Sorry I'm no Rachel Phelps but jesus you can't slide hard into second anymore. You can't trample over the catcher anymore. We now have "challenges".

http://www.nj.com/sports/index.ssf/2...s_rays_ut.html

It's good to see at least one manager has spoken out in a way.

Gibbons got a lot of flack for that!

I hear what you are saying, and I miss old time hockey, but with the current batch of lawsuits due to concussions and after hearing these guys speak who's careers were cut short (never mind the suicides) it has opened my eyes big time!

I know ball is a far cry from hockey as far as injuries go, but it was only a matter of time before ball, and all other sports, were looked at and changed due to ongoing injuries.

Just hope they can do something with all the theatrics in soccer as I might actually watch a game every now and then. :D

interesting

Cobb
 

Actually if you listen to the audio version of "The Glory of..." they have 5-6 interviews with Cobb's teammates - and almost all defend him regarding the sharpening of spikes issue. One teammate - perhaps it was Davey Jones - indicated Cobb even approached the Commish about outlawing sharpened spikes. In the interview, teammates indicate Cobb did not want to be portrayed in that fashion. However, another written source indicates if Cobb did sharpen his spikes, it was an intentional act to unnerve the opposition - and would have done it with some deliberation to be seen by the opposing team.

Sadly, all of his teammates portray Cobb as an intense loner without many friends. And they also state that he was picked on relentlessly - even by his teammates....hiding his glove, stealing his shoes, etc. I imagine that would get tiresome after a while - even for the most patient.

Z

He was hard driven
Emotionally damaged from a real jacked up home life
A Southerner in a very Northern Baseball league at a time when he might as well have been a foreigner.
The polar opposite of the team favorite, Sam Crawford.
This guy was a loner for a reason and he was completely misunderstood.

Cobb had an awful introduction to the major leagues. His father was murdered/killed 3 weeks before he debuted, his teammates sawed his bats in half, hid his equipment, taunted him about his father's death, and a whole lot more - all while he was 18 years old. It's not hard to imagine that he was shaped for the worse as a result.

Even with all this going on, he managed to make some very good friends in baseball. Some of which like Mickey Cochran he took care of after baseball. Walter Johnson and Tris Speaker both were friends and thought well of him. His insistence of Crawford's induction into the HOF tells me that in-spite of the fact that Crawford did more to damage his reputation as a player and a person than anyone, he was forgiving.

hell...ty had a repertrois of 9 different slides!!!! Thats HOF worthy!

what none of you are asking is why would the league knowingly
fictionalize a players entire life for the sake revisionist history and let a myth live
indefinitely?

I havent read the article yet so I dont know how they address his alledged beating up of a fan that the long baseball documentary had no problem retelling.
Even though they were supposed to do exhaustive research

We're talking the people that sold the Cooperstown myth for decades...
The "fan" in question harassed Cobb for a year or more and had been asked/told multiple times to knock it off. It's worth noting that his teammates went on strike to protest Cobb getting suspended.

Right on Both counts

I would have to agree with you. It is puzzling to me how a man could be disliked almost universally by players & teammates, yet have friends that give a markedly different picture of him later in life. He was obviously an intelligent man - having used his pay to buy Coca-cola stock and an interest in a bottling operation which made him wealthy.

Makes you wonder what he would be like if you met him in person.

Question for all the lawyers in the house. If the above respondents in this thread were in a jury pool, would their posts here help you to determine whether or not you would dismiss them as a candidate? :)

Mr. Leershen's book on Cobb won the SABR Larry Ritter award for 2016 last week

I am gonna by this book and see first hand what he thinks.

I think you would have a hung jury. We could determine that he was difficult but negligently an A-hole!!:D

Not surprising at all from an organization that does actual research. :)

One general observation from a number of these posts. It's interesting reading comments on 'facts' from those who either haven't read the article or repeating claims made from previously (fabricated) works as 'facts'.

I would also offer that Cobb wasn't as much "misunderstood" as he was "misrepresented".

Cobb
 

My comments were made based on the 6-7 first hand interviews Ritter recorded when researching material for his book. The interviews were recorded and were first had accounts from teammates and other players that played with Cobb. :)

Zach,
Sorry, I poorly structured that post. I was NOT implying you, but others earlier in the this thread that seemed to be repeating other Cobb 'myths'.

Was Cobb beating up a crippled fan a myth? That's the one I hear over and over and is enough (personally) for me to condem a man. Plus, reading through the original article, the author mentions 3-4 other incidents of violence. Seems like Cobb should've spent most of his playing years behind bars..

Have you ever been heckled? Has anybody ever verbally abused you during the course of your work? The crippled guy may have been handicapped but he certainly was man enough to say some pretty bad stuff to Cobb over the course of several games. My old man lost his right arm at age twelve and he certainly never shied away from the good fights. He thought me that if your willing to say it you darn well be willing to back it up. The handicapped man had been warned several times and continued anyway. If you are man enough to say it then you are man enough to tote the a$$ whooping that comes with it. That's not just my opinion, it's the opinion of the entire Detroit squad, most of which hated Cobbs guts. They boycotted in support of Cobb.

Okay, so here are the stories I have heard:

In spring training of 1907, a black groundskeeper, Bungy Davis, tried to either shake Cobb’s hand or pat him on the shoulder. Cobb was outraged, slapping Davis in the face and chasing him until Davis’s wife attempted to intervene. Cobb choked her until Tigers’ catcher Charlie Schmidt pulled him off her and punched him in the face.

In 1908 in Detroit, Cobb stepped in freshly poured asphalt and a black workman named Fred Collins made his displeasure known. Cobb punched him the face, knocking him to the ground. A Detroit judge and likely Tigers’ fan found Cobb guilty of battery, but gave him a suspended sentence. Cobb paid Collins $75 to avoid a civil suit.

In 1909 in Cleveland, Cobb was charged with attempted murder after stabbing a black night watchman named George Stansfield. Stansfield had intervened after Cobb had slapped a black elevator operator. Cobb’s lawyers, one of whom was a former mayor of Cleveland, managed to get the charges reduced to assault and battery. Cobb pled guilty and was fined $100. Stanfield filed a lawsuit, but he and Cobb settled out of court. (In the comments, Fricks insists, without providing any evidence, that Stansfield was white, and that biographer Charles Alexander knew this but decided to lie about it.)

In 1912 in New York, Cobb attacked a white man for a change, charging into the stands during the sixth inning and administering a savage beating to heckler Claude Lueker. The insult that pushed Cobb over the edge? Lueker called Cobb “a half n**.” (Irrelevant to the question of Cobb’s racism: Lueker didn’t have hands. When the crowd pointed it out, Cobb yelled “I don’t care if he doesn’t have feet.”) Cobb was suspended ten games for the incident. “When I spectator calls me a half n*** I think it’s about time to fight,” Cobb told the Detroit Free Press.

In 1914 in Detroit, Cobb arrived home with a dinner guest, only to find his wife upset over an argument she had earlier in the day with a local butcher, William Carpenter. Cobb phoned Carpenter, telling him he was coming to see him in the shop, then grabbed his revolver and headed over. When Carpenter saw Cobb enter with a gun, he quickly apologized. Carpenter’s assistant, however, brandished a meat cleaver and advanced on Cobb. Cobb pistol whipped the assistant while Carpenter called the police. Cobb spent the night in jail, and although the assistant decided not to press charges – possible Tigers’ fan alert – Carpenter did. Cobb pled guilty to disturbing the peace and paid a $50 fine. You will never, ever guess Carpenter’s skin color.

In 1919 in Detroit, Cobb called hotel chambermaid Ada Morris a n******. Morris talked back, and Cobb responded by kicking her in the stomach and knocking her down a flight of stairs. Morris broke a rib and was hospitalized; the hotel manager threw Cobb out. Morris subsequently filed a $10,000 lawsuit against Cobb. Though the matter was covered in the black press, it was kept out of the white papers. Ultimately, Morris was paid an undisclosed sum and dropped the suit.

So, from the referenced article, the author doesn't deny any of these things happened, but claims the parties involved MAY not have been black. I'm sorry, but switch out the parties involved with white men/women and you still have a violent sociopath. Ty Cobb may not have been racist (even though he most certainly was), but he was an extremely violent and terrible person.

Actually, the author does NOT claim those involved MAY not have been black. Quite the opposite.

"It describes three people who fought with Cobb—a night watchman, a bellhop, and a butcher—as being black.... Looking into census reports, birth certificates, and contemporary newspaper accounts, I found that all three of the black fighters cited by Charles Alexander were in fact white. Yes, Cobb had also fought with two black men during his life, but those fights didn’t have racial overtones, and Cobb—who had an extremely thin skin—fought with many more white men."

The above are some of the examples you cite to 'prove' that he was racist, yet if they were not black, how could they be attributed to racist acts. In addition, the author provides some evidence (or justification) that Cobb may have been more color-blind than most.

Similarly, you tout the handicapped fan as having no hands, yet the article is as follows: "And yes, he once went into the stands and repeatedly punched a man who had been heckling him for more than a year, and who turned out to have less than the full complement of fingers—hence the story of him attacking a handicapped fan." (for some reason I remember seeing he was missing 3 fingers on one hand, but can't find the source)

So the bottom line is the referenced article is REFUTING some of the stories you tout (as racist) and clarifying the incident with the man who "didn't have hands", and not 'adding to them' as you claim. While Cobb wasn't a saint by any means, I believe the title of the thread still has merit based on the referenced article.

Either you have an incredible memory to provide such detailed examples, or you have reference material. If the latter, please provide what you are using as your source of information.

You need to listen to the Sam Crawford and Davy Jones segments of the audio version of "The Glory Of Their Times." You can speculate that there was jealousy and resentment when they talk about Cobb, but to think that all those stories and the tone of their voices when they talk about him was manufactured for the interviews defies credulity. I've no doubt Cobb did many good things in his life and had a good side to him, but there's also no doubt he could be a real bastard, too.

I am flabbergasted that they would award their top book prize to an author who thinks it's possible to get a home run on a ball hit back to the pitcher.

He may not have been a racist(even though he most certainly was) is such a duplicitous remark. To be frank with you, my our standards today, All of them were racist and violent. The Christian Gentlemen himself got into a fistfight in the stands at one time. To say with such certainty any of the three accusations you have made in your last paragraph is conjecture at best. I disagree with your assessment. Ty Cobb was a bonafide Superstar who like many superstars today may or may not have been put is very difficult positions. So many stories have been refuted by evidence that I find it hard to believe the possibly true ones completely. We will never know what kind of man he truly was and many an Author will make countless dollars debating it. I prefer to view Ty Cobb as a misunderstood Anti-Hero who had a lot of good mixed with a lot of bad.

This story was actually covered in the audio version of TGOTT as well. Cobb was defended (I state defended in the lightest possible terms) by the player on the audio version....which I think was Davey Jones. According to Jones, Cobb was hounded incessantly by this fan, game after game. The audio version doesn't state specifically what was mentioned in the various taunts - but other sources indicate the taunts were quite cruel. Cobb went into the stands and beat up him up - some time during the course of which Cobb found out he was severely handicapped.

I am not defending Cobb and by any means. Certainly on every level his actions were repugnant - but most portray the incident as if Cobb knew beforehand that the fan was handicapped. This is the way the story was portrayed in several bio's.

So where are these stories from exactly? I don't believe them for a minute....

Looks like a list from reddit.

Taylor- I would question your "research", contemporary accounts disagree with your findings. As I have said before Charles Alexander's reputation as a historian and researcher are impeccable. The most irritating thing for historians is to have authors discount actual contemporary accounts by reading between the lines to "revise" history to their liking. Not saying you did this but history is history.

About three years ago on the SABR Deadball Era discussion group the then director of the Cobb Museum tried to "revise" history and he was ripped to shreds by over 20 historians including John Thorn.

Cobb was one of the greatest players of all time and must have had some wonderful qualities but the facts are that he was very troubled and had a violent nature. The real puzzle is that he showed in his investments and business dealings that he had a wonderful mind just never able to control his anger.

As far as him receiving special treatment by the courts, and police, just look at today's athletes?

As opposed to everyone in the NFL :rolleyes:

Mike,

Read the Leerhsen book, he does a good job and perhaps in your judgement of Alexander an uphill battle at defaming his theories on Cobb. He gives definitive proof on responses from Alexander himself when Leerhsen questioned where he received information on the three fights.

Alexander admitted to Leerhsen he didn't have factual information on, nor did he research the race of the individuals in question. Which in hindsight would presumably be an assumption. And if you can earn respect off of assumptions well shit I'll write a book my own off of them.

What kind of gun did Alexander claim was used to kill Cobb?

Yeah. That was one thing Alexander got wrong, indicating it was a shotgun, yet all the contemporary accounts indicate it was a revolver (or some form of handgun). It appears the 'shotgun' account was first encountered in Stump's TRUE magazine article, though there could be an earlier first reference that appeared in the mid '50s.

To be fair, Alexander got many (most?) things right, and one mistake doesn't prove others, but it should caution those to trust everything as written. His book was a product of the '80s in that he had no where near the access to the information that is available today online (court records, birth certificates, newspaper accounts, etc), which makes this type of research a bit easier and more comprehensive (assuming you filter out the noise of the internet).

Regarding the Larry Ritter award.

"The Larry Ritter Award winner’s work must demonstrate original research or analysis, a fresh perspective, compelling thesis, impressive insight, accuracy, and clear, graceful prose. Charles Leerhsen’s new Ty Cobb biography contains these requisites in abundance.'

For those that quetion Leerhsen's work. Do you really think SABR is sacrificing "accuracy" (along with the research) simply for a "fresh perspective" or "clear, graceful prose"?

For those who have more experience. Could any of you provide a short list of quality Cobb biographies? I am about to purchase the Leerhsen book and would like to cross reference it with some others.

I actually found his book very bland. But maybe it's just me. Everyone else seems to like him.

War on the Basepaths by Tim Hornbaker

That book was released the same day as Leehrsen's and is superior, IMHO.

Might be the case but Alexander's work on Cobb is terrible. He made assumptions (when facts were available), got stuff wrong, and relied on Al Stump. These are not the things an "impeccable" historian does.

Ok, I bought it on Amazon. I almost bought Glory of their Times as well as I have never read it. I may order it once I finish this one.

Wherever the truth may lie, you have to admit this is part of the fun of baseball. We just seem to be warming up the hot stove in the Spring rather than the Winter!

This type of thread is why I am glad I found this board. There is a wealth of knowledge and contrasting and well supported opinions.

+1.

Regards,

Larry

A big +1 here also,

Larry

So just throwing this out there.... General consensus who is a worse villain Ty Cobb or Al Stump???

Stump, hands down. He was a leach.....

As a newbie, if you review the last 8 pages of this thread, you could easily come to the conclusion that the only thing everyone can come to an agreement on is Stump

Charles Leerhsen gives a ready defense for Ty Cobb in less than 5 minutes
 

Thanks for sharing that.

I don't know the history of most players, especially the ones who played years ago, but if I were to guess, I'd say Ben Chapman likely ranks right up there with the worst of them.
https://www.theatlantic.com/entertai...i-42-i/274995/