Jump to content

Unbreakable Records - When The Sun Goes Supernova, They'll Still Be In The (Ashen) Books


DonRocks

Recommended Posts

Somewhere, buried in a box in Fairfax, is the most incredible VHS video.

A large-screen TV is in the background, 1-year-old Matt Rockwell is in the foreground, and I am filming. Mark McGwire is at-bat on September 27, 1998.

Could he possibly do it?

whaam.jpg

While I was filming, I was screaming, "He did it! He did it!" followed by more screaming, and then at some point by "Matt, you will never, *ever* see anything like this in your life again!" Mark McGwire had just hit his *70th* home run, and I thought I had just captured the single greatest, most important video ever taken.

And then three years later, Bonds jacks 73.

How many times in my life have I heard overzealous broadcasters, or read hyperbolic writers, claiming that such-and-such is a record that will stand for all eternity, only to have it broken five, ten, twenty, fifty years later? Far too many times. This is one of the most overused, hackneyed pieces of rhetoric in all of sports, and whenever I hear it, I cringe because I hear it about once a month.

But I can pretty much guarantee that there is one sports record that will never, *ever* be broken. Ever. One day the human race will go extinct. One day the sun will explode. And on those days, *this* record will still not have been broken.

On April 23, 1999, Fernando Tatis of the St. Louis Cardinals hit two grand slams in one inning, off the same pitcher (Chan Ho Park).

Let's think about this.

In particular, let's think about what it would take to *break* that record. Not tie it; break it.

A team would have to bat a minimum of 22 batters in one inning, 19 of whom would have to face the same pitcher (who, by definition, would have already given up a minimum of 16 runs that inning, and have the bases loaded before facing the batter for the 3rd time).

Notwithstanding the obvious that the pitcher would have been long-since pulled from the game, the odds of that situation happening are so great that it brings to mind the Ackermann Function.

One day - years, decades, perhaps a century or two from now, someone might tie that record. But nobody, but nobody, will ever, ever break it. Fernando Tatis is assured a place in the record books for all eternity.

And alas, so is Chan Ho Park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about this?

This is impressive, that's for sure.

I had *no* idea that the cheesy 1970s movie Cannonball Run was based on a true story and a real person!

One thing I'll add is that I can easily see this broken, depending on what "this" is. Can't you envision, sometime in the next 500 years or so, an electric car with a battery so durable it needs no recharging for days, and the U.S. sanctioning a cross-country run to demonstrate the new technology to the world? I'm not saying it's likely, but I don't think some scenario like that is impossible - maybe in that situation, a run could be done in under 20 hours.

(On the other hand, I suppose the rules of baseball could change 5,000 years in the future, and teams could regularly score 400 runs a game, so there are a lot of inherent assumptions made in a thread like this - basically, a gentleman's agreement that the sport in question will basically remain the same, and that would mean no U.S. sanctioned cross-country run because that would take away 80% of the danger.)

Under the current rules and laws, making that trip in under 29 hours is ridiculous. Still, it seems like there have been several successful attempts in the 31-hour range. I'm not sure whether to sit back and be awed, or argue that it's possible to break this record. Regardless - talk about anti-heroes ... Basquiat ain't got nuttin' on these guys.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course you never know what the future will bring, but I doubt anyone will ever break Jimmy Connors's record of winning the U.S. Open men's singles championship on grass, clay, and hard court, since no one will ever have the chance.

I mentioned this in Post #3 above: Rule changes are kind of a cheat, don't you think? If they permanently eliminated the 3-point shot in the NBA, whoever holds the records now would hold them forever.

William Renshaw holds the record for most consecutive Wimbledon Men's Singles titles - six - but back then (1882-1889), the previous year's champion had an automatic berth into the finals, having to win only one match to win the championship - everyone else in the tournament was grinding it out merely for the right to play Renshaw for the title. In my mind, this makes Borg's and Federer's five-consecutive titles each downright monumental.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until the PED era in baseball, I thought no one would break Lou Gehrig's record of 23 grand slams....then came the totally tainted Alex Rodriguez with 24.

However, Lou Gehrig still holds the record for 5 seasons with 400 or more total bases. That is baseball's offensive plateau. Just for context, Hank Aaron did it once, in 1959, and Jim Rice did it once, in 1978. Setting aside the ridiculous year of 2001, when all of Sammy Sosa, Todd Helton, Barry Bonds, Luis Gonzalez (and Alex Rodriguez came up just short at 393 that year), the accomplishment is a rare feat of baseball production. Nobody will ever break Lou Gehrig's record of five seasons with 400 or more total bases.

And then there's the ultimate unbreakable baseball record. In 1938, Johnny Vander Meer pitched two straight no-hitters. To break that record, someone would have to pitch three straight no-hitters. Not only will that record not be broken, it's unlikely that record would ever be tied.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will DiMaggio's 56-game hitting streak ever be broken? With the much heavier use of relievers, I highly doubt it.

Amazingly, after the streak was broken, Joltin' Joe went on to have another streak of 16 games-- in other words he went 72 for 73!!! That's gotta be one of the most incredible records in all of sports.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will DiMaggio's 56-game hitting streak ever be broken? With the much heavier use of relievers, I highly doubt it.

Amazingly, after the streak was broken, Joltin' Joe went on to have another streak of 16 games-- in other words he went 72 for 73!!! That's gotta be one of the most incredible records in all of sports.

Well, you almost said it yourself....the 56-game hitting streak was almost a 73-game hitting streak! And the game that stopped the streak at 56 games featured two Brooks Robinson-esque plays by Indians' 3rd baseman Kenny Keltner, otherwise the streak would easily have continued.

I'm not going to say it won't ever be broken (DiMaggio himself had a 61-game steak in the Pacific Coast League before joining the Yankees), but it's probably because of a combination of specialized pitching, especially in the late innings, as well as the emphasis on getting on base and slugging, which results in higher OPS. (Getting on base means taking a lot of pitches and only swinging at pitches in your kill zone, and slugging means swinging for extra bases.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until the PED era in baseball, I thought no one would break Lou Gehrig's record of 23 grand slams....then came the totally tainted Alex Rodriguez with 24.

However, Lou Gehrig still holds the record for 5 seasons with 400 or more total bases. That is baseball's offensive plateau. Just for context, Hank Aaron did it once, in 1959, and Jim Rice did it once, in 1978. Setting aside the ridiculous year of 2001, when all of Sammy Sosa, Todd Helton, Barry Bonds, Luis Gonzalez (and Alex Rodriguez came up just short at 393 that year), the accomplishment is a rare feat of baseball production. Nobody will ever break Lou Gehrig's record of five seasons with 400 or more total bases.

I went straight to Don Mattingly, who hit for average, had a healthy number of home runs, and was known for hitting a ton of doubles (look at his 1984-1986 seasons), and his best season was 388 total bases - his fifth-best season was 301.

The reason I question this is that Babe Ruth had *nine* seasons of at least 365 total bases, with his best five being 457 (?!), 417, 399, 391, and 388 - that's pretty close, and averages out to over 410 total bases for each of those five seasons.

Amazingly, Lou Gehrig had 403 one year and didn't lead the league.

I'd never heard of this record before, and I suspect it will be around a long time - for someone to break it, they'll need six seasons. If the human race survives, I think it could happen in the next few hundred years, but this is up there with Cy Young and his 511 career wins (that works out to almost 26 wins a year for 20 consecutive years) and with Sam Crawford and his 309 career triples (that works out to almost 16 triples a year for 20 consecutive years which doesn't sound like much, but it is (*) - btw, this is my "stat that nobody knows about," and to save you the trouble of looking, Ichiro Suzuki has 85.)

(*) If you want to make it even tougher, qualify it with "in less than a 20-year career" - that removes people like Cobb and Wagner from the list, and gives second place to Dan Brouthers with 205. Anytime you're ahead of #2 by over 50%, you're looking pretty good.

My problem with records such as this is that everyone said the same thing about Lou Gehrig's consecutive-games streak, and it didn't even last 75 years. Records that involve consistent performance over a long-term are going to be broken as people live longer and play longer; it's the "weird stuff" like "Tatis' two grand slams in one inning against the same pitcher" that are seemingly impossible to break (can you imagine someone hitting *three*?)

Even more unbreakable are things such as "highest shooting percentage in a quarter while scoring 37-or-more points" by Klay Thompson (it can't be broken - he shot 100%).

Or striking out 3 batters in a single inning. Gotcha! Here's the list of pitchers who have struck out 4 batters in an inning (but never on 12 pitches!)

Here's an interesting record: Most Assists in One NHL Season. The record is held by Wayne Gretzky with 163. What makes this so remarkable isn't that only two other players (Mario Lemieux and Bobby Orr) have over 100; it's that Gretzky not only holds the record as #1, he's also #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #9, #10, #11, and #12. :blink: In terms of "The Big 4" - MLB, NBA, NHL, and NFL -  I put only Wilt Chamberlain and Babe Ruth alongside Wayne Gretzky as the three athletes of the 20th century who achieved total domination of their sport. Gretzky is also #1, #2, #8, and #10 in single-season goals.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or striking out 3 batters in a single inning. Gotcha! Here's the list of pitchers who have struck out 4 batters in an inning (but never on 12 pitches!)

In April of 2013 Tony Cingrani (who the fuck is that?) struck out Denard Span, Bryce Harper, Ian Desmond, and Adam LaRoche in the same inning. This was only 10 days after Cingrani's major league debut.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In April of 2013 Tony Cingrani (who the fuck is that?) struck out Denard Span, Bryce Harper, Ian Desmond, and Adam LaRoche in the same inning. This was only 10 days after Cingrani's major league debut.

I don't want to be disrespectful to Cubs fans because of Ernie Banks, but this man's name, and what he's known for, must hurt.

175px-Orval_overall.jpg

He was actually a good pitcher - he's on that four-strikeouts-in-one-inning list - and he was an All-American in college football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other thing with MLB records is that there are so many more teams now, such that there are twice as many total games played in a MLB season nowadays as compared to the 1950s or even the 1910s.

This is perhaps true (I haven't run the numbers) - Up until 1903, a team would play a 140-game schedule, from 1904-1961, they would play a 154-game schedule, and since 1962, they have played a 162-game schedule. That could affect certain records, but not others, at least not in the way we're discussing - would you happen to have some examples?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wayne Gretzky's 50 goals in 39 games in 1981.  Goals 46-50 were scored in one game against the Philadelphia Flyers.  The 50th was an empty-netter.

And since Don mentioned Bobby Orr earlier, one NHL record that will never be shattered is Orr's plus-minus, at +124 in the 1970/71 season.  Basically speaking, plus-minus is an individual player's goal differential:  how many times he was on the ice for a goal vs. the number of times he was on the ice for an opponent's goal.

The plus-minus award was given between the 1982/83 and 2007/08 seasons.  In that timeframe, the best number was by some guy named Gretzky at +98 in the 1984-85 season.  He won three plus-minus trophies (he also won one before the award was created).

Besides his +124, Orr has the record for winning the best plus-minus 6 times, but they were all before the award was established because he had to retire due to knee injuries.

BTW, Orr's "flying goal" to win the Stanley Cup was in the 69/70 season.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wayne Gretzky's 50 goals in 39 games in 1981.  Goals 46-50 were scored in one game against the Philadelphia Flyers.  The 50th was an empty-netter.

And since Don mentioned Bobby Orr earlier, one NHL record that will never be shattered is Orr's plus-minus, at +124 in the 1970/71 season.  Basically speaking, plus-minus is an individual player's goal differential:  how many times he was on the ice for a goal vs. the number of times he was on the ice for an opponent's goal.

The plus-minus award was given between the 1982/83 and 2007/08 seasons.  In that timeframe, the best number was by some guy named Gretzky at +98 in the 1984-85 season.  He won three plus-minus trophies (he also won one before the award was created).

Besides his +124, Orr has the record for winning the best plus-minus 6 times, but they were all before the award was established because he had to retire due to knee injuries.

BTW, Orr's "flying goal" to win the Stanley Cup was in the 69/70 season.

I was wondering if someone was going to mention Orr.

As a corollary to Orr's +124 1970-71 season, he is also the only defenseman (and the only player besides Gretzky and Lemieux) to score over 100 assists in a season - he also won the league scoring title twice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somewhere, buried in a box in Fairfax, is the most incredible VHS video.

 ...

But I can pretty much guarantee that there is one sports record that will never, *ever* be broken. Ever. One day the human race will go extinct. One day the sun will explode. And on those days, *this* record will still not have been broken.

On April 23, 1999, Fernando Tatis of the St. Louis Cardinals hit two grand slams in one inning, off the same pitcher (Chan Ho Park).

Let's think about this.

In particular, let's think about what it would take to *break* that record. Not tie it; break it.

A team would have to bat a minimum of 22 batters in one inning, 19 of whom would have to face the same pitcher (who, by definition, would have already given up a minimum of 16 runs that inning, and have the bases loaded before facing the batter for the 3rd time).

Notwithstanding the obvious that the pitcher would have been long-since pulled from the game, the odds of that situation happening are so great that it brings to mind the Ackermann Function.

One day - years, decades, perhaps a century or two from now, someone might tie that record. But nobody, but nobody, will ever, ever break it. Fernando Tatis is assured a place in the record books for all eternity.

And alas, so is Chan Ho Park.

It's very unlikely for all the reasons you cite but not impossible for one reason you didn't. Remember last year's Nats/Giants Game 2 here that went 18 or 19 innings before we lost? I was at that game. In extra inning affairs that run long, reliever options dwindle. It would have to be the top of a twenty-something inning. Or, in regulation of a serious blowout. In either case, a pitcher could remain with the game totally out of hand. Yes, pretty unlikely but I think possible.

In April of 2013 Tony Cingrani (who the fuck is that?) struck out Denard Span, Bryce Harper, Ian Desmond, and Adam LaRoche in the same inning. This was only 10 days after Cingrani's major league debut.

They barely know his name in Cincinnati but now that Latos is gone, Tony will now have every chance to blossom. They said the same about Billy Hamilton two years ago. Being in the midwest doesn't help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is perhaps true (I haven't run the numbers) - Up until 1903, a team would play a 140-game schedule, from 1904-1961, they would play a 154-game schedule, and since 1962, they have played a 162-game schedule. That could affect certain records, but not others, at least not in the way we're discussing - would you happen to have some examples?

The total number of MLB games in a season is a lot greater than it was in past eras, so the probablity of seeing weird stuff happen may go up, as a not-small percentage of MLB games ever played has been just in the last few decades. Longevity records like Cy Young's win total will never be broken; pitchers today don't go as deep in games as ever before; L-R specialization and other factors have seen strikeouts go way up. But other stuff that is just weird things happening in a game as you mention w/ Tatis, or some other fluke performance, can happen more just out of probablity, I would think. I don't really have any concrete examples, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's one from the folks at 538.

The Year Ron Hunt Got Hit By 50 Pitches

This is a *fun*, really well-written article, and an absolute pleasure to read.

The author claims that Don Baylor getting hit 30% less-often than Hunt (35 vs. 50) is a more significant difference than Walter Johnson winning 19% fewer games than Cy Young (417 vs. 511), and based on raw statistics, that's true, but I don't think we can use raw statistics as the arbiter here.

Since 1990, the highest win totals are 355 and 354 (Greg Maddux and Roger Clemens) - also a 30% difference, so I suggest it's about the same.

I don't propose 511 career wins is absolutely unbreakable, but boy that sure is a lot of wins: 20 years of 25 wins per year! Something will have to change, fundamentally, about baseball itself for someone to win 512 games right now.

Plus, think for a moment about how *easy* it is to get hit by a pitch. In 2004, Ichiro Suzuki had 704 at-bats - is it really that hard to imagine someone getting drilled 51 times in a season? That's less than once every 3 games. I can envision some cocky, aggressive leadoff hitter who crowds the plate, daring pitchers to hit him, and happily getting beaned because it's the equivalent of hitting a single. Taking one for the team, then stealing 2nd base, and all of a sudden, your team has a runner in scoring position with none out in the 1st - that's pretty potent stuff.

The standard-deviation chart is impressive looking, but again, I don't think you can look at this in terms of raw statistics. It's going to take a batter with a serious attitude - someone who *wants* to get hit because of limited hitting abilities, but great speed (that's why he'd bat leadoff and steal 2nd base). Essentially, this is what Ron Hunt did!

And I'd *love* to see a video of that brawl between him and Bob Barton.

You know what? I don't like arguing at all (in fact, I hate it), but I *love* arguing (debating) about baseball. And I learned something today because I had no idea Ron Hunt held this record, and by such a vast margin. Thank you for posting the article!

This is why people should be very careful about saying a record will never be broken:

Beamon's jump is the most amazing Olympic moment I've ever seen, but Franz Klammer's 1976 downhill run might be the most exciting:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, I think Cy Young's 511 is more unlikely to be broken than DiMaggio's 56.

I would agree with you. Pete Rose had a serious run at it while DiMaggio was alive and well.

When I say "unbreakable," I mean that if you can imagine things staying the same until the sun explodes, the records will stand intact. I honestly believe the Tatis-Park record is unbreakable, and I'm not convinced that I've read about another one on this thread that is.

One of the nice things about baseball is that it has remained *somewhat* static in terms of rule changes, so older records still have some context to us, but I also think the "tradition" of the Grand Old Game is overplayed, and that it has, indeed, changed a good deal over the decades (just off the top of my head: lowering the pitcher's mound, adding the DH in the the American League, switching away from the dead-ball era, steroids (which have nothing to do with "baseball" per se, but fucked up *everything*), better equipment despite sticking with wooden bats, taking away the high strike (Chan Ho Park himself would have been greatly injured by this) - the use of relief pitchers en masse is a "strategy change" and so is perfectly consistent with the rules of old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Most Grand Slams in the same inning off of the same pitcher" has too many unnecessary criteria to it to make it all that meaningful to me. Sure, it's not on par with something like "Most RBI in a day game, in July, 2 days after a full moon, in the Central Time Zone, against a left-handed pitcher", but it's not as clean and simple as "Most hits in a season".

Had Park been pulled for another pitcher, would that have changed Tatis' accomplishment? Had the inning actually ended and Tatis' 2nd GS happened in the next inning, would that really change much?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Most Grand Slams in the same inning off of the same pitcher" has too many unnecessary criteria to it to make it all that meaningful to me. Sure, it's not on par with something like "Most RBI in a day game, in July, 2 days after a full moon, in the Central Time Zone, against a left-handed pitcher", but it's not as clean and simple as "Most hits in a season".

Had Park been pulled for another pitcher, would that have changed Tatis' accomplishment? Had the inning actually ended and Tatis' 2nd GS happened in the next inning, would that really change much?

Park's record (giving up 2 Grand Slams in 1 inning to the same batter) is just as unbreakable as Tatis'.

Had the inning ended, and Tatis hit another Grand Slam in another inning, it wouldn't be nearly as significant (or unbreakable) - 13 players have hit 2 Grand Slams in 1 game (nobody has hit 3, and I suspect it will be quite awhile before anyone does, but the "1 inning" restriction makes the record pretty unbreakable - the additional restriction of "against the same pitcher" makes it even more so.

My guess is that a player will hit 3 Grand Slams in 1 game before another player hits 2 Grand Slams in 1 inning.

I think the same thing that makes this record unappealing to you is the very thing that makes it so unbreakable - the fact that it's so specific. Nobody thought Gehrig's 2,130 Consecutive Games would be broken, or McGwire's 70 Home Runs, or for that matter, Ruth's 60 Home Runs. I can't think of a single record that involves "careers" or "seasons" that might not be broken one day; it's only the freak event that seems to break the laws of probability - like what happened between Tatis and Park - that you can say will stand "until the sun explodes" with any degree of confidence.

Quite frankly, I can't imagine anyone ever winning 511 games again, but I thought McGwire's 70 Home Runs record would stand for centuries (and it stood for exactly 3 years). To baseball fans around that time, the reasons behind the sudden increase in power production were every bit as baffling as what's going on with White Burgundy (incidentally, that problem still remains unexplained, although global warming is looking more-and-more likely as a cause - Washingtonian beat Wikipedia to the punch :)) - people were guessing "smaller strike zone," "better athletes," "tighter baseballs," etc. etc., and no explanation seemed to cover all the bases; and then, along came steroids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the same thing that makes this record unappealing to you is the very thing that makes it so unbreakable - the fact that it's so specific. Nobody thought Gehrig's 2,130 Consecutive Games would be broken, or McGwire's 70 Home Runs, or for that matter, Ruth's 60 Home Runs. I can't think of a single record that involves "careers" or "seasons" that might not be broken one day; it's only the freak event that seems to break the laws of probability - like what happened between Tatis and Park - that you can say will stand "until the sun explodes" with any degree of confidence.

I'm old enough to remember when Roger Maris broke Ruth's record in 1961.  I was a very young kid then and had started following baseball and would watch it when available  (in black and white tv). and go to some games.  I was also avidly reading about it.

Maris and Mickey Mantle were both belting homers at an astounding pace.  I think the year before they finished 1/2 in homers in baseball with 40 and 39.   There were all sorts of commentary following this phenomena....some of which had to do with the baseball season being longer in 1961 than in 1927 and thus controversy concerning whether a "record" would be a "record" if the Ruth record was not surpassed in the first 154 games.  That was one stream of commentary and controversy.

Then Maris and Mantle were compared.  Mantle had hit over 50 homers earlier in his career.  He was the clear media favorite...(and certainly I was a big fan and rooting for him)

But one other stream of commentary was flying around as Maris and Mantle were belting home runs and showing that they had an opportunity at this record;   It was fairly regularly pointed out that occasionally players had gotten very close to the 60 home run total.  In the 30's both Jimmy Foxx and Hank Greenberg belted 58 home runs in two different years.  They got very close and in seasons that were the same length that Ruth played;  154 games.   Both had stretches where they were belting lead leading Home Run totals for a healthy span.  They too were prodigious.

Hitting 50 or more home runs was dramatically rare between Ruth's record and when Maris topped it in 1961, some 30+ years after Ruth...but it was acknowledged that it was "possible".   (highly unlikely....but acknowledged as possible).

I guess its all rhetoric and makes for a lot of barroom debates and discussions;  always better with a few beers....but I would say that the Ruth record was one wherein there was at least a fairly argued possibility that breaking it was not at all out of the realm of possibility just incredibly difficult and highly unlikely.

I suppose I would argue that an "unbreakable record" might be one where 2nd place is nowhere's close to the existing record; for instance the 511 victories by Cy Young.   These days its incredibly difficult for a pitcher to amass 20 victories in a season, let alone aggregate a series of 20 game victories over several or 10 seasons....and 30 victories seems completely impossible these days based on rotations and use of relief pitchers, etc.

I'd vote for that one as unbreakable as the next highest total is in the 400's...and nobody gets remotely close to it in this era and the way baseball is played these days.   Just my $0.02   :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

or for that matter, Ruth's 60 Home Runs.

But one other stream of commentary was flying around as Maris and Mantle were belting home runs and showing that they had an opportunity at this record; It was fairly regularly pointed out that occasionally players had gotten very close to the 60 home run total. In the 30's both Jimmy Foxx and Hank Greenberg belted 58 home runs in two different years.  They got very close and in seasons that were the same length that Ruth played; 154 games. Both had stretches where they were belting lead leading Home Run totals for a healthy span. They too were prodigious.

Hitting 50 or more home runs was dramatically rare between Ruth's record and when Maris topped it in 1961, some 30+ years after Ruth...but it was acknowledged that it was "possible". (highly unlikely....but acknowledged as possible).

I should have said, "or for that matter, Ruth's 54 Home Runs." When Babe Ruth hit 54 Home Runs in 1920, the 2nd-highest total ever hit was 29 by Babe Ruth in 1919, and the 3rd-highest ever hit was 25 by Buck Freeman in 1899. When Ruth hit 54, nobody ever thought it would be broken, but that record lasted precisely 1 season because in 1921, Ruth hit 59 Home Runs.

At the end of the 1921 season the person with the 2nd-highest number of single-season Home Runs was Buck Freeman with a formidable 25 Home Runs in 1899, so Ruth's number was 238% of the 2nd-highest.

Needless to say, the record for Most Home Runs in 2 consecutive seasons was probably considered even less likely to be broken. In 1920-1921, Ruth hit 113 Home Runs, and the 2nd-highest total was by pioneering dead-ball era slugger, Gaavy Cravath with a relatively remarkable 43 Home Runs in 1914-1915. Ruth's 2-season total was 262% more than Cravath's (*).

Ruth's 2-season record is so formidable that it *still* stands as the non-steroid-era record (**) - the only back-to-back seasons where 1 player produced as many Home Runs as Ruth were the 4 deepest years of the Steroid Era: 1998-1999 (McGwire, 135; Sosa, 129), 1999-2000 (Sosa, 113) 2000-2001 (Bonds, 122, Sosa 114), 2001-2002 (Bonds, 119, Sosa 113). You should pause for a moment here, and think about the significance of Ruth's 1920-1921 seasons.

(*) Cravath also launched 62 Home Runs in the 1913-1915 seasons - numbers in the dead-ball era which would be respectable even by today's standards. For those really into trivia, the 2nd-highest total over 3 consecutive seasons at that point was by Bill Joyce with 37 Home Runs in 1894-1896.

(**) Ruth's single-season record of 60 Home Runs also still stands as the non-steroid-era, 154-game record. After 154 games, Roger Maris had 59 Home Runs; after 158 games, 60 Home Runs; and after 162 games, 61 Home Runs. I say this with no disrespect to Roger Maris, who was a wonderful person (he used to play racqetball with a friend of mine). When 19-year-old Sal Durante caught the 61st Home Run ball, and tried to give it back to Maris, Maris politely declined, and told Durante to "... make yourself some money." (Happily, Durante sold the ball for $5,000 (18-months' salary for him at the time), and the generous buyer, Sam Gordon, gave it back to Maris - the ball is now in the Baseball Hall Of Fame in Cooperstown).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll add a vignette about Roger Maris, and it recalls another record that might never be broken. I worked at Honeywell about 25 years ago for a brief period of time, and a co-worker there was an older guy named Oz. Well, Oz grew up in North Dakota, and played some high school football back in the '40s. He told me he once held the North Dakota high school record for return TDs in a single game -- two, one punt return and one kickoff return. The record was broken by Roger Maris, with four return TDs in a single game -- two kickoffs, one punt, one interception. I wonder if that record will ever be broken?

BTW, Maris still holds the single season record of 61 HRs in an untarnished 162-game season. The only players to hit more were all on PEDs, and that's pretty much undisputed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll add a vignette about Roger Maris, and it recalls another record that might never be broken. I worked at Honeywell about 25 years ago for a brief period of time, and a co-worker there was an older guy named Oz. Well, Oz grew up in North Dakota, and played some high school football back in the '40s. He told me he once held the North Dakota high school record for return TDs in a single game -- two, one punt return and one kickoff return. The record was broken by Roger Maris, with four return TDs in a single game -- two kickoffs, one punt, one interception. I wonder if that record will ever be broken?

BTW, Maris still holds the single season record of 61 HRs in an untarnished 162-game season. The only players to hit more were all on PEDs, and that's pretty much undisputed.

Although I don't think the record is unbreakable, Doug Williams passing for 4 TDs in one quarter in the Super Bowl could last for a long time - the "catch" being that only one Super Bowl is played per year, so in the next 1,000 years, there will only be 4,000 chances to break the record (assuming humanity doesn't destroy itself, I'm sorry, I've been reading Kurt Vonnegut).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I don't think the record is unbreakable, Doug Williams passing for 4 TDs in one quarter in the Super Bowl could last for a long time - the "catch" being that only one Super Bowl is played per year, so in the next 1,000 years, there will only be 4,000 chances to break the record (assuming humanity doesn't destroy itself, I'm sorry, I've been reading Kurt Vonnegut).

It's all in the framing. Williams did this, appropriately, in Q2 of SB XXII (22). It's the current record for a half also. So, frame it as only one to throw four in the first half and only 2000 chances in your next millennium. Or, just 1000 chances to break the Q2 record, though that's probably much squishier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, I think Cy Young's 511 is more unlikely to be broken than DiMaggio's 56.

How about Jack Chesbro in 1904: 48 complete games in a single season? (He also started 51 games that years and won 41, so it's conceivable that he had 41 complete-game victories in a single season - if that's true, it would be a difficult record to break.)

ETA - Never mind: Old Hoss Radbourn won 59 games in one season.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one has ever executed more than one unassisted triple play in a career, nor hit into one. Will someone ever attain either record, and will someone else surpass it?

I think it's safe to say the "single-inning" record will never be surpassed. :)

(I assume you meant to say "hit into more than one." I think both are possible, sure, and I suspect certain positions (2B?) are more likely to make unassisted triple plays in the field, so if it ever happens twice, I doubt it would be a right-fielder who executes them.)

My guess is that it happens most often with runners on 1st and 2nd, and a hard liner is hit to the right side of the second-baseman, who catches it in the air, steps on second base, and chases down the runner who can't get back to first.

Brooks Robinson made three errors in one inning. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's safe to say the "single-inning" record will never be surpassed. :)

(I assume you meant to say "hit into more than one." I think both are possible, sure, and I suspect certain positions (2B?) are more likely to make unassisted triple plays in the field, so if it ever happens twice, I doubt it would be a right-fielder who executes them.)

My guess is that it happens most often with runners on 1st and 2nd, and a hard liner is hit to the right side of the second-baseman, who catches it in the air, steps on second base, and chases down the runner who can't get back to first.

Brooks Robinson made three errors in one inning. :(

Yes, of course, I meant no one has hit into more than one unassisted triple play. According to Wikipedia, there have been 15 unassisted triple plays in major league history; eight by shortstops, five by second basemen, and two by first basemen. They all or almost all involve a line drive hit directly at an infielder who catches it for the first out, steps on a base for a force for the second out, and tags a runner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, of course, I meant no one has hit into more than one unassisted triple play. According to Wikipedia, there have been 15 unassisted triple plays in major league history; eight by shortstops, five by second basemen, and two by first basemen. They all or almost all involve a line drive hit directly at an infielder who catches it for the first out, steps on a base for a force for the second out, and tags a runner.

Eight by *selfish* shortstops! Instead of throwing to first for the easy third out, they scamper after the runner to get the unassisted triple play. :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an interesting record: Most Assists in One NHL Season. The record is held by Wayne Gretzky with 163. What makes this so remarkable isn't that only two other players (Mario Lemieux and Bobby Orr) have over 100; it's that Gretzky not only holds the record as #1, he's also #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #9, #10, #11, and #12. :blink: In terms of "The Big 4" - MLB, NBA, NHL, and NFL -  I put only Wilt Chamberlain and Babe Ruth alongside Wayne Gretzky as the three athletes of the 20th century who achieved total domination of their sport. Gretzky is also #1, #2, #8, and #10 in single-season goals.

Outside "The Big 4," although he didn't achieve "total domination," Muhammad Ali must be considered as someone who transcended their sport.

Someone who *did* dominate boxing, for a short while, was Mike Tyson, who won his first 19 professional fights by knockout - 12 in the first round.

In Track and Field, there's Michael Johnson, Carl Lewis, and the fastest person who has ever lived, Usain Bolt.

As long as we're at it, Jim Thorpe's achievements were ridiculous.

PS - I read in the Thomas Boswell column today that Cal Ripken's consecutive-game-streak lead (the *lead*) over the #2 active player is over 2,200 games: longer than Lou Gehrig's streak.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Most Grand Slams in the same inning off of the same pitcher" has too many unnecessary criteria to it to make it all that meaningful to me. Sure, it's not on par with something like "Most RBI in a day game, in July, 2 days after a full moon, in the Central Time Zone, against a left-handed pitcher", but it's not as clean and simple as "Most hits in a season".

Had Park been pulled for another pitcher, would that have changed Tatis' accomplishment? Had the inning actually ended and Tatis' 2nd GS happened in the next inning, would that really change much?

How about Klay Thompson's record for "most minutes played in an NBA quarter" (12, shared by numerous others)?

Now somebody's going to produce some weird quarter that had more than twelve minutes in it. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about Klay Thompson's record for "most minutes played in an NBA quarter" (12, shared by numerous others)?

Now somebody's going to produce some weird quarter that had more than twelve minutes in it. :)

:)

Obviously a great accomplishment by Thompson. But, seriously, I'm not sure I get the focus on "the quarter". If someone else scored 37 points in a shorter period of time that just happened to span multiple quarters, I'd prefer that record to Thompson's record.

It's kind of like how we like to talk about hitting for the cycle in baseball, but kind of ignore if a player has 2 HR, 1 2B, and a single. I mean, we don't ignore it, but we just call it a great game and don't give it a cool name like "the cycle" even though he had a better game than someone who hit for the cycle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's kind of like how we like to talk about hitting for the cycle in baseball, but kind of ignore if a player has 2 HR, 1 2B, and a single. I mean, we don't ignore it, but we just call it a great game and don't give it a cool name like "the cycle" even though he had a better game than someone who hit for the cycle.

I would argue that 1) certainly a triple is more difficult than a home run, and surprisingly 2) there are times when a triple is more beneficial to the batting team than a home run.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No-hitters are fairly common, but Johnny Vander Meer pitched two in a row in 1938! I can see someone tying that record but not breaking it, given how starting pitchers rarely even complete games anymore.

Also, the rules have changed for how many high school basketball games a team can have in a season, so the all-time career scorer will probably remain Greg Procell of Ebarb, Louisiana.

"A Scorer's Mentality Lives On" by Jere Longman on nytimes.com

(Basketball was King where I grew up! I can still hear coach with a Cajun accent yelling "Run and shoot! Run and shoot! Run and shoot! And when you shoot, shoot wit autority!")

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/20/2015 at 11:06 AM, MC Horoscope said:

Also, the rules have changed for how many high school basketball games a team can have in a season, so the all-time career scorer will probably remain Greg Procell of Ebarb, Louisiana.

"A Scorer's Mentality Lives On" by Jere Longman on nytimes.com

Okay, I was prompted by your post, and thought of one that may never be broken: Consecutive Free Throws.

My brother was at a little fair in Jacksonville, Florida about 20-30 years ago, and there was this guy - short, dumpy, bald, white, looked like a farmer - standing in front of a basket.

He was taking on all comers, in a "Best of 10" free-throw shooting match, where the contestant would pay something like $10, and win some huge prize - I don't know what, maybe a giant, $100 stuffed animal, or maybe a $50 gift certificate; something worth multiples of $10. The catch: the contestant had to win; not tie.

My brother stood and watched for about an hour. Cocky teenagers would come up, look at this dumpy man, and hand over their money. They'd shoot their free throws. However many they'd make, this dumpy farmer would shoot his, never missing. Once he reached the target number, regardless of whether it was 3, or 6, or 9, he'd simply stop.

After about an hour, my brother walked up to him, and asked him what his deal was. This guy had terrible form, and would never get this shot off in a basketball game because it would be blocked. The guy, Ted St. Martin was his name, just said, 'Yeah, it's just something I've always been good at.'

When my brother left, the man still hadn't missed.

Well, it turns out that Ted St. Martin holds the record for "Consecutive Free Throws Without A Miss." And it's not 50, or 100, or 200, or anything "normal" like that. This guy once shot for 7 hours and 20 minutes without missing, and hit 5,221 free throws in a row. Ted St. Martin is a free-throw-shooting savant. There was no chance of anyone winning a prize that day, because even if they hit all 10, they'd still lose

That said, Wikipedia says, "St. Martin also holds the world record in shots made (84), made in 8 minutes from thirty feet from the basket. This record was made in February 1974. This was before there was three-point shooting in basketball. (Thirty feet is well beyond today's three-point line.)."

84 in 8 minutes is approximately 10 shots per minute, or one shot every 6 seconds. Assuming he had someone rebounding and feeding him back the ball, I propose that a guy who went to my high school, Buzzy Braman (*), could have topped that record - maybe not now because he's 60, but certainly 10-15 years ago. Buzzy Braman *might* be the greatest shooter to ever live. Read this article before you don't believe me (incidentally, Milt Kline was a good friend of our family's, and came to both my dad's and my mom's funerals - he used to work for my dad as a gym teacher at White Oak Junior High School (can you tell I'm proud of my dad?)). Just so you don't think he's some apocryphal figure, here's Buzzy Braman, "The Shot Doctor," in action, with one of his students, Penny Hardaway:

(*) The article also mentions Eddie Peterson, who is a near mythical figure in Montgomery County basketball. He is universally regarded, by everyone from Buzzy Braman, to Craig Esherick, to Brian Magid, as "The Greatest Shooter To Ever Live." My brother knew all those guys (he and Brian Magid were on the same bowling team, and Craig Esherick is one of his best friends), and even he says Peterson was the best - that said, all of this was before Braman emerged as "The Shot Doctor," so who really knows?

"The Top 10 'White Guy' Montgomery County Shooters Of The '70s" from "The Great Book Of Washington, DC Sports Lists" by Andy Pollin and Leonard Shapiro.

Screenshot 2016-12-22 at 10.42.28.pngScreenshot 2016-12-22 at 10.42.51.png

In case you think it keeps getting more ridiculous, everything pretty much stops at Eddie Peterson. Even though Braman is ranked higher, I think even he'll say that Peterson was The King.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And then there's Joe Oeschger who pitched all of 26 innings in a single game, which Baseball Almanac considers to be an unbreakable record.

Unbreakable, but (incredibly) tied several minutes later, in the bottom half of the 26th inning, by Leon Cadore.

I think the record for "Most Combined Innings Pitched In A Single Game By Opposing Pitchers" (52) is pretty safe for awhile. :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or how about Deacon Phillippe, of nearby Rural Retreat, VA, who threw five (count 'em) complete games in one World Series, that of 1903....he then missed half of 1904 with a sore arm.

The Wikipedia entry says: " Phillippe struck out 10 batters and earned the win against Cy Young ...."

I was mentally ready for the rest of the sentence: "against Cy Young award winner, so-and-so ...." but no, it was just: "against Cy Young." :wacko:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Wikipedia entry says: " Phillippe struck out 10 batters and earned the win against Cy Young ...."

I was mentally ready for the rest of the sentence: "against Cy Young award winner, so-and-so ...." but no, it was just: "against Cy Young." :wacko:

Earlier in the thread Cy Young's 511 wins was discussed as an unbreakable record. Even more unbreakable might be his 316 career losses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...