Let's Re-Visit The Great Debate

[G1911]

Originally Posted by raulus

Does it matter anymore whether he did or didn’t actually do it?

It just seems like the myth and the legend has taken over the public consciousness to the point where whether it ever really happened is irrelevant.

The truth is always relevant to the subject, sir.

Whether a sports game is is another story…

Documentary evidence is ambiguous, witness testimony is not in accord with each other. It’s probably not true, the story told is too clean and perfectly polished, but it’s a good story and in character.

[brunswickreeves]

Could you imagine a duel signed Ruth / Root ball from that game? We can get close to the events of time through a piece of memorabilia or cards.

[jingram058]

Here is the Zack Taylor of the Cubs who stated he saw Ruth do it. He said this 3 weeks before he passed away. Basically a deathbed confession. I have more faith in first person, eyes on, rather than armchair analysis from decades afar

[Peter_Spaeth]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8ao5sBj7xQ

[Yoda]

One thing is for sure: The Babe sure gave his hecklers in the Cubs dugout hell as he rounded the bases.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by G1911

The truth is always relevant to the subject, sir.

Whether a sports game is is another story…

Documentary evidence is ambiguous, witness testimony is not in accord with each other. It’s probably not true, the story told is too clean and perfectly polished, but it’s a good story and in character.

I get your point. And I certainly agree.

My point was that even if ironclad proof were to come out tomorrow that it absolutely didn’t happen, we would all (well, 99.99% of the population) quickly forget about said proof, and the legend would live on as it has these last several decades, in spite of the proof to the contrary.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by raulus

I get your point. And I certainly agree.

My point was that even if ironclad proof were to come out tomorrow that it absolutely didn’t happen, we would all (well, 99.99% of the population) quickly forget about said proof, and the legend would live on as it has these last several decades, in spite of the proof to the contrary.

I don't see why that would be. Much of the staying power of the Called Shot is its ambiguity and Ruth's own shifting story.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I don't see why that would be. Much of the staying power of the Called Shot is its ambiguity and Ruth's own shifting story.

I think you’re probably right, at least for a small subset of the population that includes people around here.

For the rest of the country/world, my sense is that the legend is already so well socialized that it has legs and will endure regardless of the facts. It’s just that ingrained.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by raulus

I think you’re probably right, at least for a small subset of the population that includes people around here.

For the rest of the country/world, my sense is that the legend is already so well socialized that it has legs and will endure regardless of the facts. It’s just that ingrained.

Well you may be right, we see every day how people can just deny or ignore established facts.

[molenick]

I wonder if there is some analogy here to the Abner Doubleday legend. The assertion that he invented baseball was disputed by Henry Chadwick even before it was made public, questioned in print by William Henry Irwin as early as 1909, and essentially disproved by Robert Henderson and others leading up to the 1939 "centennial".

I would think anyone on this board and any more-than-casual baseball fan knows that Abner Doubleday did not invent baseball. But for the casual or non-baseball fan, I think many still consider Abner Doubleday as the inventor of baseball. They certainly know his name more than they do Cartwright or any of the other members of the Knickerbockers who some feel have more (or at least equal) claim to being baseball's "inventor" (Adams, Tucker, Wadsworth, and Wheaton).

I think even if we somehow disproved that Babe called his shot, the legend will continue to be accepted. Especially because it is true that he actually did hit a home run and did make some kind of gesture before doing so, whereas Doubleday had no connection to baseball at all.

[Peter_Spaeth]

On the basis of what evidence did the Mills commission conclude Doubleday was the inventor?

[packs]

I've always liked this Root album page and photo I picked up:

[Eric72]

EDITED OUT MY ORIGINAL POST.

Michael (the post directly above) beat me to it...and was much more informative.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by raulus

I get your point. And I certainly agree.

My point was that even if ironclad proof were to come out tomorrow that it absolutely didn’t happen, we would all (well, 99.99% of the population) quickly forget about said proof, and the legend would live on as it has these last several decades, in spite of the proof to the contrary.

Never let ironclad proof get in the way of a narrative

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

Never let ironclad proof get in the way of a narrative

Especially if you're running for.... oh wait never mind.

[conor912]

“If I thought for one second he was calling his shot, I would have put the next pitch in his ear” - Charlie Root….and I believe him.