Real Single Season Home Run Champion

J7.

J7.

CAGiversary!
Feedback
6 (100%)
In your opinion who is the real single season home run champion and what do you base it on?

I have to go with Maris, but when I learn more about each player's season and what they faced I may change my opinion. Maris hit 61 in relatively the same amount of time as Ruth under more intense pressure and a hostile environment. In the film 61* it shows that he had a chance to break the record in the same amount of games as Ruth but he had to deal with shitty weather that day and they put in a new pitcher at Maris' last at bat that game who specialized in knuckleballs. We know McGwire used steroids and evidence points to Bonds using steroids as well. So I would put them in this order:

1 Maris
2 Ruth
tie 3 McGwire
tie 3 Bonds
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Griffey never hit more than 56 and Sosa failed a test in 2003. Although Griffey deserves to be the one below Ruth.
 
Who voted for Bonds, I'm a diehard Giants fan but I'll even admit the truth. Then again he has never been caught and steroids wasn't against the rules.
 
Here's more fuel to the fire. This stuff about Ruth when you combine both the + and - makes Maris' accomplishment all the more impressive to me.

Ruth
- never played a night game.
- faced old has beens for relief pitchers.
- never played cross-country for a night game and played a day game the next day.
- never played in front of millions of viewers.
- never ran on artificial turf.

But...
"Until 1931 in the AL, balls that hit the foul pole were considered ground-rule doubles, and balls that went over the wall in fair territory but hooked foul were ruled foul. Many fields, including Ruth's home Polo Grounds, had exceptionally deep center fields—in the Polo Grounds' case, nearly five hundred feet. The author concluded that Ruth would have been credited with 104 home runs in 1921, if modern rules and field dimensions were in place."

Players today have access to much better conditioning, medical attention, sports science than Maris and far more than Ruth.

"Ruth hit more home runs in 1927 than nine of the Major League teams did.
That's like someone hitting 200 home runs today.
The guy that finished second that season was Bob Meusel, who hit 24.
That's a difference of 35.
It was the second straight season Ruth had 35 more homers than the guy in second place.
It's a mark that still stands."

[quote name='Thongsy']Who voted for Bonds, I'm a diehard Giants fan but I'll even admit the truth. Then again he has never been caught and steroids wasn't against the rules.[/QUOTE]

Steroids were illegal in the US.

[quote name='seen']http://comedians.jokes.com/daniel-tosh/videos/daniel-tosh---steroids[/QUOTE]

Ruth may have faced pitchers as fast as those of today. There is anecdotal evidence. As for no black baseball players back then, that is a huge point. Although, a black player has never claimed the record without using steroids either. It is well known that they were not allowed to play during that time so I question whether an asterisk is justified. If you were just posting for fun, yes I laughed.
 
I think that you have to acknowledge what Barry Bonds and McGwire did but as people that I just don't like anymore I'm defaulting back to Maris. I don't particularly hold the HR record in high esteem because I can see the Maris record being broken some day. Look at the HR leader this year hitting more than three times his avg or the guy on some insane HR streak recently.

As for the Maris vs. Ruth thing, I think it's stupid to bring up what could have happened depending on certain parameters. If it happened it happened and everyone should decide for themselves who they think is better.
 
Park dimensions when Babe Ruth played at the Polo Grounds:


  • Left Field Line - 277 ft.
  • Center Field - 433 ft.
  • Right Field Line - 258 ft.
Add to that the barring of non-white players, and right field fence of 295 feet down the line and a straight-away right field fence of 350 while Ruth played at Yankee Stadium... it takes Ruth's feats from otherworldly to ... well, they're still otherworldly. Gives a little more perspective, though.

To be honest, I'm more impressed by DiMaggio's 46 HR in 1937, with a straight-away left field fence distance of 415 feet, and left-center field distance of 457 feet. Ridiculous.
 
Yup, Dimaggio's home run streak is the only baseball record I pay attention to/care. The rest is just baseball masturbation/ bullshit at this point thanks to all the cheaters, liars, etc.
 
[quote name='hiccupleftovers']Yup, Dimaggio's home run streak is the only baseball record I pay attention to/care. [/QUOTE] I think you mean consecutive games hit streak.
 
[quote name='Feeding the Abscess']Park dimensions when Babe Ruth played at the Polo Grounds:


  • Left Field Line - 277 ft.
  • Center Field - 433 ft.
  • Right Field Line - 258 ft.
Add to that the barring of non-white players, and right field fence of 295 feet down the line and a straight-away right field fence of 350 while Ruth played at Yankee Stadium... it takes Ruth's feats from otherworldly to ... well, they're still otherworldly. Gives a little more perspective, though.

To be honest, I'm more impressed by DiMaggio's 46 HR in 1937, with a straight-away left field fence distance of 415 feet, and left-center field distance of 457 feet. Ridiculous.[/QUOTE]

That is equally impressive. One has to question how many of those would've been homers if they were under the same foul ball rules as Ruth's and how many Ruth lost, especially when both of them were hitting them far quite often so they had more time to go foul after originally being fair. See below for an example.

As a rookie Ruth hit one legitimately confirmed to be 470 feet. And then,

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/feats/art_hr.shtml
"For perspective, consider the computerized measuring system implemented by IBM in most major league cities in 1982. By 1995, the sponsorship had changed, but the program had been expanded to include every big league ballpark. During those years, only one drive of 500 feet was confirmed by this system. Cecil Fielder of the Detroit Tigers is credited with powering a ball 502 feet in the air over the left-field bleachers at Milwaukee's County Stadium on September 14, 1991. Such renowned sluggers and extraordinary physical specimens as Jose Canseco and Juan Gonzalez have never come genuinely close to the 500-foot threshold. The best effort on the part of either player was Canseco's famous blast into the fifth level at Toronto's Sky Dome during the 1989 American League playoffs, which was estimated at 484 feet."

In returning the discussion to Babe Ruth, it can be said that he defies rational analysis. Not only did he set distance records in every major league ballpark (including National League stadiums where he played only infrequently), he also set similar standards in hundreds of other fields, where he made exhibition and barnstorming appearances. Amazingly, many of those records remain unequaled, which is to say that Ruth is a true athletic anachronism. In virtually every other field of endeavor in which physical performance can be measured, there are no Ruthian equivalents. In 1921 alone, which was Ruth's best tape measure season, he hit at least one 500 foot home run in all eight American League cities. There should be no doubt about the authentication of these conclusions. Despite the scarcity of film on Ruth, we can still make definitive evaluations of the approximate landing points of all of his 714 career home runs."
Click to expand...

He may not have hit as many in a stadium as deep as DiMaggio did, perhaps due to DiMaggio having more control over his hits while Ruth had more power, but Ruth was hitting them so far when he did hit them and did this often so he had to have lost many from the foul rule.

Info about that,
http://www4.stat.ncsu.edu/~reiland/baseball.html
With the exception of a couple of months at the start of the 1920 season, from 1906 to 1930 the foul lines were "infinitely long": A fly ball over the fence had to land in fair territory (as determined by the infinitely long foul lines), or be fair when last seen by the umpire, in order to be a home run.. In other words, a fly ball that went over the fence in fair territory but "hooked" around the foul pole (if there was a foul pole) was ruled a foul ball. Old pictures of the New York Polo Grounds show ropes strung in line with the foul lines from each foul pole to the back of the stadium to assist the umpire in determining whether a "home run" was fair when last seen. The current rule, rule 6.09(d), says only that the ball must be fair when it goes over the fence.

Baseball historian Bill Jenkinson estimates that Babe Ruth probably lost about 75 home runs because of the pre-1931 rule. Here is one example of a disallowed Ruthian blast that he cited based on newspaper reports of the day:

"On August 21,1920, Babe launched one far over the right field grandstand roof at the Polo Grounds. It was obviously fair when it left the park and Ruth proceeded to trot around the bases. When he arrived at home plate, the umpire disallowed the homer with the explanation that the ball had landed on foul ground somewhere out in Manhattan Field." (As Bob Uecker would say, "you'll need a visa to go find that ball").

Part of the rationale for the "infinitely long" foul lines is that in the early years ballparks did not always have foul poles. When a long fly ball was hit down the left or right field foul line, the absence of foul poles made it difficult to determine the status of an airborne ball relative to the foul line when it broke the plane of the outfield fence. It was easier to determine the fair/foul status by viewing (or estimating) the eventual landing point. Foul poles now have a screen two feet wide attached to the fair side of the pole to serve as an additional visual aid for the umpire on the really close calls.
Click to expand...

[quote name='Hostile']I think that you have to acknowledge what Barry Bonds and McGwire did but as people that I just don't like anymore I'm defaulting back to Maris. I don't particularly hold the HR record in high esteem because I can see the Maris record being broken some day. Look at the HR leader this year hitting more than three times his avg or the guy on some insane HR streak recently.

As for the Maris vs. Ruth thing, I think it's stupid to bring up what could have happened depending on certain parameters. If it happened it happened and everyone should decide for themselves who they think is better.[/QUOTE]

It's longevity versus being good enough to do it all at once. Some records are more impressive yes. The length a record stands says a lot too. Not counting out all the variables though.

What Maris vs Ruth parameters do you think are stupid to bring up? I would disagree with that. Although I do agree everyone should decide for themselves who they think is better. Next to records they should include information about key variables so that people can have more to base their decision off of.
 
All ballparks today have their quirks that kinda dick up the home run races. Like the Green Monster, etc.

I voted for Maris, but I'd put Ruth above those two roid monkeys. That guy showed up to games drunk and still hit homers.
 
[quote name='crunchb3rry']All ballparks today have their quirks that kinda dick up the home run races. Like the Green Monster, etc.

I voted for Maris, but I'd put Ruth above those two roid monkeys. That guy showed up to games drunk and still hit homers.[/QUOTE]

:lol: it's funny because it's true -> Ruth drunk at bat, probably hung over too. I've got a feeling that sports leagues often change rules to stabilize the game over time when they deem necessary and destabilize it at other times. Maybe it's necessary but it makes comparisons damn difficult, maybe it makes comparisons more fun though.
 
[quote name='Cap03']Bonds all the way.[/QUOTE]

That's bullshit. There's no way he didn't use steriods. Compare how he looks now to his rookie card.

barry-bonds-rookie-card.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top