Friday, August 29, 2003
I defeated Jessup in our weekly tennis match for lunch today. Betting lunches on our matches hasn't detracted from their competitive integrity. If anything, it has improved on it - I was down 5-2 in the final set and I doubt I would have summoned the considerable energy to win if only my meagre pride were at stake. So one wonders why Pete Rose has been banned for life for betting on his own baseball team (clarification 8/30 - betting on his own team TO WIN - I've never seen him accused of betting against his team). The only direct harm people bring up is that Rose bet on particular games, not on his team winning the World Series, and he might have done things to compromise his team's long-term well being for short-term gain.
It seems to me that this harm is negligible; at least it's probably less harmful than things like incentive clauses in player's contracts for # of hits, stolen bases, innings pitched or all-star team selections, which can certainly make players do things that are not in their team's best interest. One is reminded of the time Jose Canseco bunted so that he would be in position to steal a base and join the 40-40 club - it was probably not in the A's interest to have Jose bunt there. (Clarification 8/30 - or imagine it's your final at-bat of the season, you have an incentive that would give you $50k if you hit one more home run. The game is tied, bottom of the ninth, bases loaded, and the count is 3-0. Should you swing away?) Of course, salary incentives are a legitimized institutional practice in baseball, which is important, but this little argument maybe should make one think that they should not be, or that betting on your on team should be legitimized as well.
The harm that could come from associating with underworld betting figures is often mentioned as another reason that betting is bad for baseball - e.g. Rose could be strongarmed into throwing games because of gambling debts. But this seems no more a reason to bar betting on baseball than any other sport.
I'm sure I'm overlooking some things, but it seems that Pete Rose probably doesn't deserve a lifetime ban from baseball. Rob Neyer, of whom I am generally I fan, suggests a five-year ban.
Pete Rose was a heckuva guy. From George Will:
Once when the Cincinnati Reds' plane hit severe turublence Pete Rose turned to a teammate and said, "We're going down. We're going down and I have a .300 lifetime average to take with me. Do you?"
That, as my friend David Hayes might say, manifests an unhealthy relationship to excellence. But it did get him 4256 hits. It's a pity, though, that his hanging around the extra years to break ty cobb's record didn't drop him below .300 (he finished at .302).
¶ 5:04 PM
It seems to me that this harm is negligible; at least it's probably less harmful than things like incentive clauses in player's contracts for # of hits, stolen bases, innings pitched or all-star team selections, which can certainly make players do things that are not in their team's best interest. One is reminded of the time Jose Canseco bunted so that he would be in position to steal a base and join the 40-40 club - it was probably not in the A's interest to have Jose bunt there. (Clarification 8/30 - or imagine it's your final at-bat of the season, you have an incentive that would give you $50k if you hit one more home run. The game is tied, bottom of the ninth, bases loaded, and the count is 3-0. Should you swing away?) Of course, salary incentives are a legitimized institutional practice in baseball, which is important, but this little argument maybe should make one think that they should not be, or that betting on your on team should be legitimized as well.
The harm that could come from associating with underworld betting figures is often mentioned as another reason that betting is bad for baseball - e.g. Rose could be strongarmed into throwing games because of gambling debts. But this seems no more a reason to bar betting on baseball than any other sport.
I'm sure I'm overlooking some things, but it seems that Pete Rose probably doesn't deserve a lifetime ban from baseball. Rob Neyer, of whom I am generally I fan, suggests a five-year ban.
Pete Rose was a heckuva guy. From George Will:
Once when the Cincinnati Reds' plane hit severe turublence Pete Rose turned to a teammate and said, "We're going down. We're going down and I have a .300 lifetime average to take with me. Do you?"
That, as my friend David Hayes might say, manifests an unhealthy relationship to excellence. But it did get him 4256 hits. It's a pity, though, that his hanging around the extra years to break ty cobb's record didn't drop him below .300 (he finished at .302).
¶ 5:04 PM
