Number one is a biggie. By betting on your own team some times, but not all of the time, you're implicitly betting against your team every time that you don't place a wager.
Ranking Cheating in Baseball
- Thread starter Red Averages
- Start date
You can foreclose conversation about it, as is your right, but my two cents say that E5 was pointing out the self-serving selection bias involved in digging up quotes that, indirectly, continue to exonerate the Yankees in the court of public opinion. And I think that has some value.
He's not the only one who's noticed that the three mods of this Red Sox-based site who happen to be Yankee fans are all reacting with great defensiveness and vigor at the mere suggestion that the Yankees may have had untoward behavior here too - despite that, between Logan Morrison and the Beltran stuff, there's way more smoke there than with, say, the Cincinnati Reds. It may amuse some, or induce eye rolls in others, but regardless, it's evident - just that E5 is the one willing to call it out.
I don't see the difference between betting on your own team to win or your team to lose. I think they're both equally wrong, and as such my list is like yours, except I have #5 on top.
On the surface, it sounds like betting on your team to win is just showing confidence in your team. BUT if you have money on your team - as a manager - you may do things you wouldn't do otherwise that may hurt your team in the following games. Example - burning out your closer by having him pitch multiple innings in an otherwise meaningless midseason game, or using tomorrow's starter for a couple of innings today. Essentially managing like it's game 7 of the world series, which is fine for a winner take all game, but obviously not sustainable over the long term.
ALSO, if you bet on your team to win 9 days in a row and don't place a bet on day 10..... that's like telling the bookies you're not trying to win today, and it's the same as betting against your team.
edit:
Many have said the same thing, and it looks like I'm just repeating everyone's thoughts.
Ok, lesson learned, I should read the whole thread before jumping in and replying.
That would be cheating the betting industry (specifically, anyone who doesn't have that information), not the sport.
I think there are much better explanations in this thread as to why betting on your own team is bad.
There is no need to read into anything though. I posted in this very thread I thought steroid use was the biggest offense and the Yankees didn’t cross my mind when I posted that. When I posted the Wood tweet I was posting to simply show what a major league pitcher thinks about the situation, the Yankees don’t cross my mind when I posted that either.
I’m just posting about baseball here. I don’t think about the Yankees 24/7.
Maybe I'm remembering incorrectly, but there never used to be an issue with irrational Yankees hate despite the board's overall slant towards rationally driven analysis. I think the guys here are all good people and I enjoy reading their thoughts so it's nothing against them, but fuck the Yankees.
All Yankees hate is rational Yankees hate 
But yeah I agree with what you say. They're good posters, they just have a big blind spot on their team's potential liability here. Which of course the rest of us are just as fervently rooting *for*.
But yeah I agree with what you say. They're good posters, they just have a big blind spot on their team's potential liability here. Which of course the rest of us are just as fervently rooting *for*.
Greater:
1) Wearing a device that electronically notifies you of a pitch (Jose Altuve, etc)
2) Using a camera in the dugout to bang on a drum (Alex Cora, etc)
4) Steroids (Barry Bonds, etc)
5) Betting on your own team to win (Pete Rose)
Middling:
3) Pine tar on a Bat / Foreign Substance on baseball (numerous)
Lesser:
3) Pine tar on a Bat / Foreign Substance on baseball (numerous)
1) Wearing a device that electronically notifies you of a pitch (Jose Altuve, etc)
2) Using a camera in the dugout to bang on a drum (Alex Cora, etc)
4) Steroids (Barry Bonds, etc)
5) Betting on your own team to win (Pete Rose)
Middling:
3) Pine tar on a Bat / Foreign Substance on baseball (numerous)
Lesser:
3) Pine tar on a Bat / Foreign Substance on baseball (numerous)
1.) Throwing a game or series, aka, the Black Sox.
2.) Betting on your team, win or lose. No need to whitewash what Pete Rose did.
<HUGE gap>
3.) Wearing buzzer
4.) Banging on a trash can.
<medium sized gap>
5.) Steroids
< 'Nuther HUGE gap >
6.) Foreign substance on baseball.
7.) Corked bat.
8.) Pine tar on bat.
6, 7, and 8 are basically small potatoes.
2.) Betting on your team, win or lose. No need to whitewash what Pete Rose did.
<HUGE gap>
3.) Wearing buzzer
4.) Banging on a trash can.
<medium sized gap>
5.) Steroids
< 'Nuther HUGE gap >
6.) Foreign substance on baseball.
7.) Corked bat.
8.) Pine tar on bat.
6, 7, and 8 are basically small potatoes.
I think if the question was "What are the most significant ways a player can cheat to raise their own game and earn more money?" the answer would be steroids, equipment tampering (corked bat, foreign substances on the ball), and amphetamines in that order.
If the question was "What are the most significant forms of cheating that lowers fan confidence in the outcome of games/seasons and the overall integrity of the game?" the answer is throwing games, betting on games and relaying stolen signs in real time to hitters at the plate via technology.
In my opinion, there's a distinction. The Astros scandal doesn't impact my opinion of Bregman, Altuve or Springer as hitters. It makes me look at the 2017 post-season in a very different light, though.
If the question was "What are the most significant forms of cheating that lowers fan confidence in the outcome of games/seasons and the overall integrity of the game?" the answer is throwing games, betting on games and relaying stolen signs in real time to hitters at the plate via technology.
In my opinion, there's a distinction. The Astros scandal doesn't impact my opinion of Bregman, Altuve or Springer as hitters. It makes me look at the 2017 post-season in a very different light, though.
I draw a line between someone like Bonds who took them to get bigger and stronger, and someone like Andy Pettite or Julian Edelman who were taking PEDs to heal quicker from injury. Don’t get me wrong though, I know that’s a thin line and the motivation for taking them is less important than the effect, which is usually going to be enhancement.
Not only that, but where is the mention of Whitey "Fraud" and his throwing balls cut on Billy Martin's belt buckle and the shinguards of Yogi Berra and Elston Howard? If we're going to discuss cheating and tainted titles, why aren't the six championships and eleven pennants won by a team whose ace, who now laughs about all he got away with, in the mix?
Also too much pine tar on a bat and putting a foreign substance on a baseball are NOT equivalent. There's no science suggesting a batter gets an advantage from loading up a bat with pine tar but plenty of science that proves pitchers gain a significant advantage from throwing a ball that has been modified is some fashion. If you want an equivalent offense, it should be corking a bat/foreign substance or scuffing a ball, since both involve altering a piece of equipment to gain a competitive advantage.
This is an odd one. Not disagreeing, just the idea of multiple players being in on this as well as the circumstances behind some of the motivations make this story fascinating. The financial reward for winning was no where close to what it is today and some of this was spurred on by the owner screwing players out of bonuses.
I agree with the numerous post above that any kind of betting on baseball is worse than the other choices in the poll. Whether you consider the perpetrators evil or simply misguided, their acts, while aimed at gaining an unfair advantage and affecting the outcome of a game, were meant for them to succeed and their team's actually win the game. Betting on the game, whether for or against your team, raises the perception of fixing games and potentially puts MLB on par with the WWF.
I also agree with Reggiecleveland above in being sick of the whitewashing of Pete Rose's actions. I went to the Red Sox Fantasy Camp in Fort Myers one year, and right on the clubhouse door, in big red letters, in two languages, was a sign with a strong warning that any betting on baseball was strictly forbidden. I've also seen that sign in two minor league clubhouses; New Britain and Norwich CT. I've heard that sign is posted in every MLB affiliated clubhouse throughout the world. You can argue that gambling is an addiction, and an addiction is a disease, but Pete Rose has no excuse.
I also agree with Reggiecleveland above in being sick of the whitewashing of Pete Rose's actions. I went to the Red Sox Fantasy Camp in Fort Myers one year, and right on the clubhouse door, in big red letters, in two languages, was a sign with a strong warning that any betting on baseball was strictly forbidden. I've also seen that sign in two minor league clubhouses; New Britain and Norwich CT. I've heard that sign is posted in every MLB affiliated clubhouse throughout the world. You can argue that gambling is an addiction, and an addiction is a disease, but Pete Rose has no excuse.
Steroids.
And it’s not even close in my opinion.
Steroids are a health hazard. Players who made steroids the price of admission in the 1990s were forcing other players to put their long-term health at risk.
None of the other cheating incidents gives people brain cancer.
And it’s not even close in my opinion.
Steroids are a health hazard. Players who made steroids the price of admission in the 1990s were forcing other players to put their long-term health at risk.
None of the other cheating incidents gives people brain cancer.
I bolded your example because it needs more emphasis. In that scenario, Rose was likely gambling with the freaking careers of young men on his team if he overburdened his bullpen in order to get even with Jimmy the Nose. That's disgusting. Pete Rose is disgusting.
I'm sure that Rose being Rose, he didn't even see the problem. I'm sure he considered any pitcher complaining of fatigue or soreness (if there were any who had the balls to complain) to be "pussies". So, in his lizard brain he wasn't risking some kid's career, their whole future and the future of the kid's family just so he could get out of the hole.
But he was. As always - fuck Pete Rose.
Brain cancer?
I know steroids are sometimes used to fight brain tumors and cancer but never heard of it causing it.
I agree with betting being in a completely different league.
Wearing a device is probably next on my list with doctoring a ball a pretty similar offense.
Using an electronic devices is slightly lower but similar offense.
I don't consider pine tar on the bat the same as the others.
Steroids is different category to me. Not sure where it falls in the list.
Lyle Alzado connected his brain cancer to his steroid use in interviews. No doctor ever supported that assertion, and there is no evidence connecting the type of brain cancer he had with steroids. Or any other to my knowledge, but I'm not a doctor. I have heard of a connection between HGH use and tumor growth, but you have to already have a tumor for that to matter.
Here's a link to what appears to be a pretty thorough list of health risks that come from the various performance enhancing drugs. No mention of cancer risk in this article, and the brain cancer connection does not appear to have ever been scientifically established, but there are various other mentions in other articles about increased risk of skin or liver cancer.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/fitness/in-depth/performance-enhancing-drugs/art-20046134
Here’s a NYT article about the prevalence of brain cancer in baseball during its steroid era, and it’s unusual clustering on some teams. They don’t say much anything about steroids. Though there’s a quote from Darren Daulton: “Probably nobody in baseball did more drugs than I did.”
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2017/08/14/sports/baseball/brain-cancer-phillies-daulton.amp.html
I love bats breaking and superballs spilling out. That's just a great visual.
I think the overall advantage of corking bats is questionable from a physics standpoint. From the last time I saw it studied it helped bat speed but reduced overall energy imparted to the ball. The same thing could be achieved just by going to a lighter bat. So let people cork em.
I don' t know if its an odd choice, as much as, at least to me, the most blatant and destructive form of cheating, and it was not included as a poll choice. At its heart sport is about trying your best to win. and that's the contract between athletes and fans. We as fans can understand and forgive (usually) cheating to gain an edge to win, but cheating to lose for gambling purposes, is not so forgivable. So I mentioned it.
Its funny, I was specificaly going to mention Whitey and Yogi shinguard scam, but decided to stay away from what might have been seen as an excesssive attack on the Yankees and their historic use of gamesmanship. So I went with a less loaded Joe Niekro.
Betting on games, to win or lose, is the biggest crime against the sport, by far, IMO. The rest of the list pales in comparison. I've also noticed more and more media stories mentioning this along side the Black Sox scandal. That's just absurd to me. Being paid off by gamblers, basically members of organized crime, to throw games, and pushing the envelope too far to get a competitive edge, are 1,000 miles apart on the offense scale.
Last edited:
Thanks. Good article. Was aware of potential increase risk in liver.
The NYT article mentions players, McGraw, Vucovich, etc. that played before what would be considered the steroid era.
So in essence there is no known link between steroids and brain cancer.
I could not agree more with what I highlighted. I didn't mean it was an odd choice, but rather it's an odd case when you factor in some of the players motives. Money is most often the motive for doing something like this, but legend has it that part of that motivation was due to the lack of money in the form of bonuses that were not paid out by owner Charles Comiskey. I think the most well known example is Eddie Cicotte being benched toward the end of the season just one win away from the 30 wins that would have netted him a $10,000 bonus.
Last edited:
Pete Rose has a gambling addiction and still does to this day. I have a relative in West Palm who lives at the horse tracks and frequents San Diego and Arizona tracks & casinos. When I say frequent, I mean he's at these places pretty much every day. Per him, Pete Rose is around all the time. Third hand information yes, but I also have seen some pictures of them together.
I guess this is semantics, but am I the only one who doesn't think betting on games is cheating? I think that it's the worst sin of sports, and acts as a complete destruction of the integrity of the game, but how is it cheating? Isn't cheating a breaking of a rule or rules in a way that gives a team an edge against an opponent that is in not breaking the same rule or rules?
I don't have a dog in the fight and hate the MFY, but does John Smoltz weighing in square it for you?
I know this scandal and rolling fallout is bumming out a lot of sports fans and Sox fans and New England fans etc and of course this forum distills and can bubble up the top 1% of that ideological intensity and ire and reaction.
If ranking cheating offenses helps one come to terms with what the Sox did and how that defines one as a Sox fan, fine. That's part of the grieving process, and this thread (as NYFans-ish as it seems) can be considered one or more of the six stages of grief.
Players or managers betting on their own team would be an existential threat to the game. Fans will not turn out if they feel that players are liable to throw games in order to make money. BC basketball was nearly killed by a point shaving scandal in 1979.
I totally agree. I'm just asking whether this belongs in the category of "cheating." Let me put it another way - Would the Dodgers have any basis to think they lost the World Series unfairly if every Astros player and coach bet on themselves to win?
Last edited:
People who learn enough math to do basic stats, but not enough to know about uncertainty and sample size are pretty dangerous.
Slightly off-topic, but I once read what a sports official said about "cheating" and he had a very unpopular, but interesting, opinion. He basically said that anything that is covered in the official rule book and has a prescribed penalty is - by his definition -not cheating. So according to this, from the above list, the pinetar / foreign substance stuff wouldn't be cheating, but everything else would be.
His argument was something like this: Rule books say things like if you balk, the runners get to advance a base. Or if you hold a defensive lineman you get moved back 10 yards. Or if you trip a skater you spend 2 minute in the penalty box. Or if you bump a shooter he gets to take some free throws. Nobody thinks that balking or being offside is "cheating". They're something you "shouldn't" do, and there are defined consequences for doing it.
Now, the baseball rulebook also says you're not supposed to use pinetar or corked bats and defines the penalty for doing so (automatic out or ejection or whatever). Why do people feel that these type of infractions are cheating but the other ones aren't? One could make an argument that a batter who uses a corked bat is trying to gain an unfair advantage without getting caught. One could also argue the exact same thing for a pitcher who uses a balk-like move and hopes to get away with it without getting caught (I'm looking at you Andy Pettitte!). What about a batter who pretends to be hit by a pitch and starts walking to 1st base? (Jeter). Or who drops a foul ball in the stands but pretends to catch it?
Just some food for thought.....
His argument was something like this: Rule books say things like if you balk, the runners get to advance a base. Or if you hold a defensive lineman you get moved back 10 yards. Or if you trip a skater you spend 2 minute in the penalty box. Or if you bump a shooter he gets to take some free throws. Nobody thinks that balking or being offside is "cheating". They're something you "shouldn't" do, and there are defined consequences for doing it.
Now, the baseball rulebook also says you're not supposed to use pinetar or corked bats and defines the penalty for doing so (automatic out or ejection or whatever). Why do people feel that these type of infractions are cheating but the other ones aren't? One could make an argument that a batter who uses a corked bat is trying to gain an unfair advantage without getting caught. One could also argue the exact same thing for a pitcher who uses a balk-like move and hopes to get away with it without getting caught (I'm looking at you Andy Pettitte!). What about a batter who pretends to be hit by a pitch and starts walking to 1st base? (Jeter). Or who drops a foul ball in the stands but pretends to catch it?
Just some food for thought.....
Interesting thought experiment but I don't buy it.
In this case (Astros), you are breaking the rules by cheating, not cheating by breaking the rules. You can break the sign stealing rules in a lot of ways that wouldn't involve cheating, such as a player just being in the room and sending an iphone video to his mom of the replay tv. That would be stupid, but it wouldn't be cheating. A team could live broadcast the game into the dugout with a view of the catchers mitt but if nobody ever looked at it or used it, they wouldn't have cheated but still would have broken the rules and be penalized.
The reason people are calling this "cheating" is because it quite literally was breaking the rules to form an unfair advantage that nobody else has unless they also cheat.
Well, there is something called live or in-game betting where you can bet on something happening or not happening, for example, over/under number of pitches in a half-inning. What would stop a pitcher from having someone place a bet on the over when the game is not on the line and he can miss the plate a few times more than usual. That would be cheating and probably hurt the house taking the bet. Giving up a home run by grooving a pitch with a big lead or deficit could be another example and in this case might cause another player to lose the HR championship.
You're talking about cheating the gamblers out of money, not cheating an opponent out of a win. The home-run championship hypothetical you're bringing up is an example of a completely unintended consequence of gambling-motivated decisions, not of an intended victory achieved by cheating.
Actions on the field affect EVERY bet that's placed. That's what people are wagering on. Stepson may not have provided the best examples, but surely in game betting can be a tempting target for someone in a position to affect the outcome.
I agree with you. It's categorically different. Cheating is crossing the line by violating the rules of the sport and we can argue which act is furthest past the line, but it all tracks in the same direction: playing to win. Throwing a game (or putting yourself in a position that makes you susceptible to it) is something completely different -- it's not even on the same axis or plane. Or whatever is a more elegant metaphor.
fair play > gray areas > Red Sox cheating > light cheating > egregious cheating > Yankee cheating
- ǝɯɐƃ ɐ ƃuᴉʍoɹɥʇ
What a player would be able to make on live betting before he and his accomplices got banned / limited at every available sportsbook probably isn't worth the risk considering how it compares with the league minimum salary. Sure, it's feasible, but not very practical. It would totally be worth it to me, but I'm not making MLB money
That's what I meant by accomplices, which I figured he'd run out of soon enough. They have to be in a tight inner circle so that they can be trusted with the secret.