A Question for the SABR Folks

[Archive]

Posted By: Kevin Cummings

I got a new (for me) book (Louisville Diamonds by Philip von Borries; Turner Publishing; 1996) yesterday about Louisville baseball and the author said there have been 5 ambidextrous pitchers in pro games.

Here's the approximate quote:

"Five pitchers are known to have switch-pitched (thrown both right-handed and left-handed in the same game) in major league history.......Besides Tony Mullane, the group includes Larry Corcoran (1884 Chicago White Stockings); John Roach (1887 New York National League Giants); another Louisville pitcher, Elton "Icebox" Chamberlain, the only man to win a switch-pitched game (an 18 - 6 victory versus Kansas City on May 9, 1888); and Greg Harris (1995 Montreal Expos)."

What makes it even more odd is that that one game was apparently the only one John Roach ever appeared in. This was the first time I had ever seen anything about Roach. I had read about the other four players in various places, so I'm wondering where the author got that piece of information.

Maybe one of you SABR members you could see if the SABR folks have a line on that fact.

[Archive]

Posted By: PianoLegs

Kevin,

John F. Roach worked only one long afternoon--May 14th 1887--for the NY Giants. He lost his debut/exit in memorable fashion, giving up 17 runs on 18 hits over 8 innings to Philadelphia. He fared better at the plate, however, going one-for-four with an RBI. According to the May 15th 1887 Brooklyn Daily Eagle, Roach--a part of the New York Reserves--was a last-minute replacement for Keefe. There is no mention in the article of his ambidexterity, but there's plenty of criticism of Giants' management. The article and box score (that mistakenly credits Bill George for Roach's only major league hit and RBI) appear on page 16. You can access them for free at:

http://brooklynpubliclibrary.org/eagle/

Just click on Login. No password is required,

By the way, I have a pretty ratty 1887 Old Judge card of F. Roach of New York. I assume this is the same player, since I can find no other in the league at that time. He's at bat in the picture, which I imagine is proof enough of a merciful God.

[Archive]

Posted By: three25hits

Kevin,

Philip Von Borries was a member of the 19c Committee for more than a decade before the book was published.

I have the author's email address and some history. Please contact me at three25hits@yahoo.com

[Archive]

Posted By: three25hits

Another SABR member responded ---

1. The Baseball Trivia Book to End All Baseball Trivia Books by Bert Sugar, 1986. On page 81, Sugar writes, "Other nineteenth-century switch-pitchers
included Larry Corcoran, John Roach, and Icebox Chamberlain."
Sugar doesn't specifically state that Roach switch-pitched in the majorleagues. In fact, Roach's name comes up in a discussion of switch-pitchers
under the question, "Who was the only player to pitch ambidextrously in aprofessional game in this century?"

2. The letters section of the September 20-22, 1991 issue of USA Weekendincluded a question asking about switch-pitchers. The answer was Mullane,Corcoran, Chamberlain & Roach. (This was prior to Harris doing it.)


The question regarding Roach switch-pitching earlier this year was raised on SABR-L, but there was no response. It seems odd that a pitcher making his
major league debut would switch-pitch, especially while tossing a 22-hitter. (It was an 18-hitter until a few years ago.) The game was played May 14, so it wasn't an end-of-season laugher.

Total Baseball VII has notations for players who pitched or batted the opposite hand for brief periods (Baumholtz.) There is no notation for Roach.

I'm inclined to believe Roach may have switch-pitched in the minor leagues, but have doubts that he did so in his debut that turned out to be his only game.

[Archive]

Posted By: three25hits

Sean Holtz from Baseball Almanac --

Saw your SABR post & their quote is very similar (same names) to the one in Jonathan Light Fraser's Cultural
Encyclopedia of Baseball so I would guess they used that as a source.

Sean
www.baseball-almanac.com

[Archive]

Posted By: John(z28jd)

Im inclined to also believe that he may have pitched with both hands in the same game but i doubt he did it in his only major league game.Its not the kind of impression you'd wanna make in your major league debut at the age of 19.
I could see people in the stands see him switch hands and say,oh so thats what he was doing wrong for the first 7 innings!

Being a big fan of one of the players who did switch pitch,i was very suprised to hear Roach's name being mentioned for the first time as possibly accomplishing this feat,after years of reading about the subject

[Archive]

Posted By: Kevin Cummings

John:

Maybe you or I would want to make a better impression in our first game than John Roach by pitching with our normal arm for the whole contest, but three things make me think he might have done it:

(1) It's not like he was in a tight contest where if he, all of a sudden, switch-pitched people would think he had gone over to the other side.
(2) We're talking about an era where what we might consider uncommon (like showing up to work drunk) was, in fact, de rigueur.
(3) You have never been the parent of a nineteen year old child. I have had two of them (so far). Sometimes there is no explanation for their behavior.

Kevin

[Archive]

Posted By: i need a Roach

Dear Kevin,
I know you need a reason to buy a card of every player from the old judge set,so if thats the reason you want to get a Roach card then i agree that he probably did accomplish this feat and since i have cards of the other 4 guys already,i will also have to get a Roach.
Sincerely yours,
John(z28jd)

[Archive]

Posted By: Kevin Cummings

First off, at the risk of repeating an often expressed sentiment, thanks to all the board members who jumped into the fray with help on this. Amazing the breadth and depth of resources here!

Unfortunately, no smoking gun yet.

I did hear from the author of the book and while he didn't commit one way or the other, he did say he would look further. Some of his response is below:

...Regarding John Roach, got it from one of the sources listed in the bibliography. Know Roach lost the game 17 to something. Originally didn't have him in the list, then ran across a list from a solid source that had him. Need to look that game up.....Thanks for writing, and if I find out anything, I'll e-mail you. You also need to remember one other thing that some SABR members don't seem to understand. Accounts of a game can vary. A New York paper might not carry the report of Roach pitching with both hands, while another paper did. It doesn't mean he didn't, it just means that one paper reported it, and another didn't. I've seen this happen time and again in my Louisville baseball research....

While I agree in principle with Mr. Von Borries emphatic "maybe," another fact supplied by board member Brian Scantland seems pretty damning. Have a look:

"...Accounts in eight papers of the May 14, 1887 Giants game. They were the New York Times, Herald, Tribune, World, Sun, and Evening Sun, and the Philadelphia Press and Inquirer. None mentioned Roach switch-pitching.

OK, so maybe one paper didn't make mention of it, but eight? If I had to vote right now, I'd be voting negatively.

[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."

[Archive]

Posted By: halleygator

If a player such as Roach pitched right-handed the entire game ...

but then switched to lefty in order to hold a speedy runner on first base ...

but then immediately picked off the runner left-handed without delivering any pitches to the plate ...

and then went back to pitching right-handed ...

would this count as "switch pitching" ??

???


On a similar note: Has there been any instances where pitchers came into a game and immediately picked off a runner for the third out and then had their team get ahead in the bottom half of the inning so that they could get credit for a "win" without ever having thrown a pitch in the game (assuming a different pitcher came into the game in the following inning)??

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff S

...I don't remember exactly what was said about it, but I'm pretty sure it has happened--maybe even this past year. I'm not sure how I'd search for that in the SABR list archives, or I'd try to find it for you.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

The discussion has been going on concurrently here and on the SABR list. If I remember the SABR thread, there seems to be agreement that Roach did not switch pitch in his only appearance as a pitcher.

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

think Amos Rusie's won/lost record was in 1895. I know that they are a bunch of baseball historians, so they should have some idea.

[Archive]

Posted By: Durward

Scott,
SABR issued a publication in 1996 entitled "Baseball's First Stars". Per this publication, Amos Rusie's pitching record in 1895 was 23 wins and 23 losses.
Durward

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

That may have been accurate in 1996, but 19th century keeps getting updated all the time, so I wouldn't count on that being the 'offical' total.

the cool thing about SABR is that no research is required and you can join as many committees as you want to. I get newsletters from the records, statistical, 19th century, Negro Leagues and Dead Ball Era committees

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

I thought this was a pretty simple question.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

Some of the things they have done are great, but I would think that if you asked a SABR member what Rusie's record was in 1895 that they could give you an answer, not say "gee, it changes all the time - isn't that cool?"

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

I just thought it odd that with all that access you have to SABR materials, that you couldn't give me an answer.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike Ward

that stats can just "change" with time. Maybe if we give a second look at every Pete Rose hit (and contact the official scorer), we can defrock him of the hit title. Then the HOF question will have less muster, hah. Call me old fashioned, but re-writing\adjusting history....I don't think so.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Scott, i'm sorry I could not help you. Even though I am listed on the records adn statistical comittees, I have never had a need to find accurate 19th century records.

As for those of you that are disturbed by "ever changing" statistics, they are changed beucase they were originally recorded erroneously. When the Original McMillian Encyclopedia was put together, they only used only one source for their data, not bothering to double check the data.

Just look at the Old Judge set with all it's mispelling, etc. This was also commonplace in newspapers. SABR researchers will check numerous different resrouce to make sure that the box scores for each game are accurate.

As I've said before on this topic, if we don't bother to find the true and accurate information, then 19th century adn Dead Ball Era baseball becomes more mythology than truth.

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

This "stat gathering" thing has been a very enlightening process. I realize that it's difficult to dig up stats that weren't that important to the players at the time, or to try and "massage" them so that they correspond more closely to modern day stats. I wonder how many games AMOS thought he won in '95?

Still, it surprises me that there are so many different efforts out there. What does each mean? Why is each different? (scratches head)

I know - I'll write an article. You can read it on those nights when the Benadryl isn't doing the job.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Where ever a researcher with SABR makes an announcement that he has found errors in the stat record he has a number of different sources to back up the claim. Also, a lot of the errors are found reading the game accounts, not just looking at the box scores.

Total Baseball, which MLB said contained the offical records, ceased publication because there were so many stat sources on the net. Sadly, I have not hear that MLB has declared any site are having the "offical" records. The Lehman Database http://www.baseball1.com/ used the numbers from Total Baseball.

As for "massaging" numbers. Those are fighting words for the people in the records committee. The analysts "massage" number

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

Its been a year since we had this discussion.Does anyone have any new info on the John Roach game that might make his case for pitching with both hands seem better,or anyone have any new info that makes it seem even more less likely that it happened

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred

Here's a picture of Roach (NY - P).