Best Sox player ever

[RibbieRubarb]

Yep...Doable

[SoxFan1]

Yep...Doable

That is affirmative.

[Steff]

RPS ought to copyright that phrase...

 

 

And thanks guys.. beers on me at the next game

[SoxFan1]

Im not old enough for beer but Ill take a ice cold Pepsi!

[SI1020]

depends on which version you believe in, i for one did not believe he was guilty. the banning from the commissioner was a sham and well as how comiskey force the issue.

 

i voted for joe with nellie being second with frank

I believe in the version where he admitted in an interview that he didn't try his best to make some plays in the Series because it would help them win.

Jackson was not dumb (he was a successful businessman after baseball), but he was country and he was illiterate and very self conscious about both. He said different things to different people at different times. He was greatly intimidated by Swede Risberg, who along with Chick Gandil were the main ringleaders of the fix. Jackson hit .375, hit the only home run of the series and led the Sox with 6 rbis. He made no errors in the field. The situation was very complicated with more twists and turns than a daylight soap opera. I feel very badly for Jackson and to an even greater extent Buck Weaver. Whatever his sins, Shoeless was the greatest Sox player ever IMO. His generations Ted Williams.

[LDF]

depends on which version you believe in, i for one did not believe he was guilty. the banning from the commissioner was a sham and well as how comiskey force the issue.

 

i voted for joe with nellie being second with frank

I believe in the version where he admitted in an interview that he didn't try his best to make some plays in the Series because it would help them win.

here is the facts from several site telling the story of the fix

 

FACT: Jackson was the star of the Series, he hit the only homerun, fielded flawlessly, batted .375 to lead all players, and his twelve hits set a World Series record that stood until Pepper Martin tied it years later. Joe accounted for 11 of the Sox 20 runs in the Series, he led players on BOTH teams.

 

FACT: On the evening after the fifth game of the Series, one of Joe's teammates (Lefty Williams) came to his hotel room and offered him an envelope containing cash. Joe refused to accept it, an argument ensued and Joe left his own room. Lefty threw the envelope down and left. This version of the crucial event in Joe's case was attested to, under oath, by the only two men who were there: Joe Jackson and Lefty Williams. Their accounts agree, Joe did not take the money, it was dumped on him. It must be noted, Lefty Williams had nothing to gain by lying for Joe Jackson, therefore....logic leads us to believe his testimony is the truth.

 

FACT: Sometime over the next few days Joe took the envelope containing the $5,000.00 that Lefty had left in his room and went to see Comiskey. He was told by Comiskey's secretary Harry Garbiner that Comiskey was busy and could not see him. Joe waited for an hour and still was told that Comiskey could not see him, so he went home. Hindsight is always 20-20 and we all know Joe should have gone to Lefty Williams and threw the cash back in his face, sadly we all know he didn't do this.....but we also know that he tried to do the right thing....to tell what he knew.....but Comiskey was in the process of a cover up....and wanted to keep Joe Jackson quiet......truth be known.....Comiskey was afraid Joe would run his mouth to the press.

 

if jackson was guilty b/c of his knowledge then comiskey and reporter at the time gleason should be found guilty as well.

 

FACT: Comiskey would not see Joe that morning, because he was in a secret meeting with two players hearing the story of the fix, however in reality, Comiskey already knew the story. Comiskey publicly proclaimed his commitment to "clean baseball", he privately spent the winter of 1919 and most of the 1920 season denying rumors about the 1919 Series and perpetrating a cover-up, in part to protect his valuable property, namely the guilty players.

 

FACT: Of the players that Comiskey fed to the Grand Jury, Joe was the most problematic. He had been the only one to warn Comiskey before the Series began. If Joe told all he knew, Comiskey's self-proclaimed integrity would be impugned and he would be revealed as a hypocrite (which he was), or worse.

 

 

so in all the sites i read, i did not see this suppose interview where he admitted that he was part of this fix.

[supernuke]

If by best you most talented its Shoeless Joe no question.

[Heads22]

Are we just going hitters? Because pitchers can be just as good of players.

[Bmr31]

The pic of Jim and I..? Yes. The Pepsi people took Tuesday.

Steff, you are a very attractive woman.

[LDF]

Steff, you are a very attractive woman.

rrrrrr

[SI1020]

depends on which version you believe in, i for one did not believe he was guilty. the banning from the commissioner was a sham and well as how comiskey force the issue.

 

i voted for joe with nellie being second with frank

I believe in the version where he admitted in an interview that he didn't try his best to make some plays in the Series because it would help them win.

here is the facts from several site telling the story of the fix

 

FACT: Jackson was the star of the Series, he hit the only homerun, fielded flawlessly, batted .375 to lead all players, and his twelve hits set a World Series record that stood until Pepper Martin tied it years later. Joe accounted for 11 of the Sox 20 runs in the Series, he led players on BOTH teams.

 

FACT: On the evening after the fifth game of the Series, one of Joe's teammates (Lefty Williams) came to his hotel room and offered him an envelope containing cash. Joe refused to accept it, an argument ensued and Joe left his own room. Lefty threw the envelope down and left. This version of the crucial event in Joe's case was attested to, under oath, by the only two men who were there: Joe Jackson and Lefty Williams. Their accounts agree, Joe did not take the money, it was dumped on him. It must be noted, Lefty Williams had nothing to gain by lying for Joe Jackson, therefore....logic leads us to believe his testimony is the truth.

 

FACT: Sometime over the next few days Joe took the envelope containing the $5,000.00 that Lefty had left in his room and went to see Comiskey. He was told by Comiskey's secretary Harry Garbiner that Comiskey was busy and could not see him. Joe waited for an hour and still was told that Comiskey could not see him, so he went home. Hindsight is always 20-20 and we all know Joe should have gone to Lefty Williams and threw the cash back in his face, sadly we all know he didn't do this.....but we also know that he tried to do the right thing....to tell what he knew.....but Comiskey was in the process of a cover up....and wanted to keep Joe Jackson quiet......truth be known.....Comiskey was afraid Joe would run his mouth to the press.

 

if jackson was guilty b/c of his knowledge then comiskey and reporter at the time gleason should be found guilty as well.

 

FACT: Comiskey would not see Joe that morning, because he was in a secret meeting with two players hearing the story of the fix, however in reality, Comiskey already knew the story. Comiskey publicly proclaimed his commitment to "clean baseball", he privately spent the winter of 1919 and most of the 1920 season denying rumors about the 1919 Series and perpetrating a cover-up, in part to protect his valuable property, namely the guilty players.

 

FACT: Of the players that Comiskey fed to the Grand Jury, Joe was the most problematic. He had been the only one to warn Comiskey before the Series began. If Joe told all he knew, Comiskey's self-proclaimed integrity would be impugned and he would be revealed as a hypocrite (which he was), or worse.

 

 

so in all the sites i read, i did not see this suppose interview where he admitted that he was part of this fix.

Great job.

[CubKilla]

Are we just going hitters? Because pitchers can be just as good of players.

That's a separate thread

[IlliniBob72]

so in all the sites i read, i did not see this suppose interview where he admitted that he was part of this fix.

Here's a quote from the Cincinnati Post, attributed to Jerome Holtzman...

 

Holtzman disagreed. "Close inspection of the play-by-play shows that he left about 10 men in scoring position in the first four games," he said. "He got all his RBI in the last four games and hit the home run in the last game. And he admitted to (reporters for) both the Associated Press and United Press on the steps of the courthouse that he was purposely slow in fielding, that he threw to the wrong base, that Cincinnati got some runs they wouldn't have because of his slow fielding."

 

In Holtzman's estimation, "If anyone deserves to be restored, it is Buck Weaver." The third baseman "sat in on the meeting but didn't take part (in the conspiracy)."

 

I believe I read this first hand in Eight Men Out by Eliot Asinof, but can't seem to find the page right now.

 

Or another quote from Eight Men Out...

 

"All week, Joe Jackson had been a disappointment to himself, playing ball with only a part of himself working. He tried to hit, he didn't try to hit. Half the time, he didn't know whether he was trying or not. He had taken only one real vicious cut at the ball with his famous black bat and conveniently failed to make contact. The $5,000 Lefty Williams had handed him in that old envelope was part payment for his lethargy."

 

Eight Men Out makes no mention of Jackson warning anyone BEFORE the Series began. Afterwards maybe, but not before. Before the Series began, Jackson demanded $20,000 for his role. Hardly a good sign. If guilt after the fact, or even during the Series got to him, that hardly makes him innocent.

[LDF]

Here's a quote from the Cincinnati Post, attributed to Jerome Holtzman...

 

Holtzman disagreed. "Close inspection of the play-by-play shows that he left about 10 men in scoring position in the first four games," he said. "He got all his RBI in the last four games and hit the home run in the last game. And he admitted to (reporters for) both the Associated Press and United Press on the steps of the courthouse that he was purposely slow in fielding, that he threw to the wrong base, that Cincinnati got some runs they wouldn't have because of his slow fielding."

 

In Holtzman's estimation, "If anyone deserves to be restored, it is Buck Weaver." The third baseman "sat in on the meeting but didn't take part (in the conspiracy)."

 

I believe I read this first hand in Eight Men Out by Eliot Asinof, but can't seem to find the page right now.

 

Or another quote from Eight Men Out...

 

"All week, Joe Jackson had been a disappointment to himself, playing ball with only a part of himself working. He tried to hit, he didn't try to hit. Half the time, he didn't know whether he was trying or not. He had taken only one real vicious cut at the ball with his famous black bat and conveniently failed to make contact. The $5,000 Lefty Williams had handed him in that old envelope was part payment for his lethargy."

 

Eight Men Out makes no mention of Jackson warning anyone BEFORE the Series began. Afterwards maybe, but not before. Before the Series began, Jackson demanded $20,000 for his role. Hardly a good sign. If guilt after the fact, or even during the Series got to him, that hardly makes him innocent.

ok, let me see if i got this right, a book which is nothing but a book say all this and it is gospel. the court reports of the case says some thing different............ ummmmm

 

the grand jury accounts mean nothing, a second trial agains means nothing. right.

 

and holtzman who was not there at the time say all this, and this guy should be believe b/c of what, his intergity and he has no other reason into this.

 

well for 19.95 you and everyone can buy the jerome holtzman book where in addition to you you wrote, you neglected to add this little paragraph, and of course he would not lie or misread or mishear anything right.

 

>>> According to newspaper reports, apparently leaked by the prosecution, Jackson also confessed his guilt in testimony to the grand jury. But in the official grand jury transcript, which Frommer located through a librarian in Greenville and included in his book, Jackson said nothing of the sort. Indeed, under oath, he testified that he did not attend the meeting in a New York hotel during which other players agreed to throw the Series and was told by Gandil that the fix was in regardless of whether Jackson went along. "I tried to win all the time," Jackson said.

 

and for those who want to look at the site in which what his name only took a paragraph to support his claim, here it is

 

http://www.cincypost.com/2003/02/25/rose02...02-25-2003.html

 

so i want to see this actual artilce of these two writers who name can't be found or verified.

 

show me the actual reporters link that states that. the yr is 1920, not something that is made up or recreated many years later.

 

let see, actual invesitagated reports say something else, all the case reports say something else, everything that was reported says something else, but we should not believe this b/c of one reporter who listen to old tapes say according to his opinion it doesn't wash. only one person opinions after soooo many others opinions neve said anything else, of course you could read it in a 19.95 book by holtzman. but selling a book was furtherest from his mind right.

 

lets see, in 8 men out, it showed pitcher Eddie Cicotte did not get the bonus that was promise him, if he reach 30 wins. the yr was suppose to be 1919, however that happen to 1917 accoding to baseball library.

 

 

ref to the game by game account, well look at this

 

http://www.blackbetsy.com/19atbat.htm

 

every at bat for joe during the series of 1919 against the reds.

[arneharris]

Dan Pasqua anyone

THIEF!!!!!

 

that's my line................................................

 

 

Chet Lemon, then.

[Steff]

rrrrrr

"rrrrr"...

[LDF]

"rrrrr"... 

i don't know what i whistle would sound like, so i thought a grrrrr would be better.

[Steff]

i don't know what i whistle would sound like, so i thought a grrrrr would be better. 

LOL... gotcha!

 

And thank you.

[clujer420]

Yep...Doable

... if you go for older chicks.

 

[IlliniBob72]

Here's a quote from the Cincinnati Post, attributed to Jerome Holtzman...

 

Holtzman disagreed. "Close inspection of the play-by-play shows that he left about 10 men in scoring position in the first four games," he said. "He got all his RBI in the last four games and hit the home run in the last game. And he admitted to (reporters for) both the Associated Press and United Press on the steps of the courthouse that he was purposely slow in fielding, that he threw to the wrong base, that Cincinnati got some runs they wouldn't have because of his slow fielding."

 

In Holtzman's estimation, "If anyone deserves to be restored, it is Buck Weaver." The third baseman "sat in on the meeting but didn't take part (in the conspiracy)."

 

I believe I read this first hand in Eight Men Out by Eliot Asinof, but can't seem to find the page right now.

 

Or another quote from Eight Men Out...

 

"All week, Joe Jackson had been a disappointment to himself, playing ball with only a part of himself working. He tried to hit, he didn't try to hit. Half the time, he didn't know whether he was trying or not. He had taken only one real vicious cut at the ball with his famous black bat and conveniently failed to make contact. The $5,000 Lefty Williams had handed him in that old envelope was part payment for his lethargy."

 

Eight Men Out makes no mention of Jackson warning anyone BEFORE the Series began. Afterwards maybe, but not before. Before the Series began, Jackson demanded $20,000 for his role. Hardly a good sign. If guilt after the fact, or even during the Series got to him, that hardly makes him innocent.

ok, let me see if i got this right, a book which is nothing but a book say all this and it is gospel. the court reports of the case says some thing different............ ummmmm

 

the grand jury accounts mean nothing, a second trial agains means nothing. right.

 

and holtzman who was not there at the time say all this, and this guy should be believe b/c of what, his intergity and he has no other reason into this.

 

well for 19.95 you and everyone can buy the jerome holtzman book where in addition to you you wrote, you neglected to add this little paragraph, and of course he would not lie or misread or mishear anything right.

 

>>> According to newspaper reports, apparently leaked by the prosecution, Jackson also confessed his guilt in testimony to the grand jury. But in the official grand jury transcript, which Frommer located through a librarian in Greenville and included in his book, Jackson said nothing of the sort. Indeed, under oath, he testified that he did not attend the meeting in a New York hotel during which other players agreed to throw the Series and was told by Gandil that the fix was in regardless of whether Jackson went along. "I tried to win all the time," Jackson said.

 

and for those who want to look at the site in which what his name only took a paragraph to support his claim, here it is

 

http://www.cincypost.com/2003/02/25/rose02...02-25-2003.html

 

so i want to see this actual artilce of these two writers who name can't be found or verified.

 

show me the actual reporters link that states that. the yr is 1920, not something that is made up or recreated many years later.

 

let see, actual invesitagated reports say something else, all the case reports say something else, everything that was reported says something else, but we should not believe this b/c of one reporter who listen to old tapes say according to his opinion it doesn't wash. only one person opinions after soooo many others opinions neve said anything else, of course you could read it in a 19.95 book by holtzman. but selling a book was furtherest from his mind right.

 

lets see, in 8 men out, it showed pitcher Eddie Cicotte did not get the bonus that was promise him, if he reach 30 wins. the yr was suppose to be 1919, however that happen to 1917 accoding to baseball library.

 

 

ref to the game by game account, well look at this

 

http://www.blackbetsy.com/19atbat.htm

 

every at bat for joe during the series of 1919 against the reds.

Now let me get this straight. I shouldn't believe Jerome Holtzman or Eliot Asinof because, according to you, they're trying to sell books, but I should believe Shoeless Joe Jackson while he's on trial for fixing the Series? Wait, what's that? Joe said he tried to win all the time? Well, hell's bells!! He's innocent!

 

I didn't "neglect" to add anything, and yes, I used one paragraph from the article, because frankly, I don't have hours to do research to prove what's already been proven, that Joe Jackson threw the World Series. You're right, the trial and grand jury finding don't mean much. That trial was such a farce, that it is used as evidence of innocence is laughable. You point to a grand jury testimonial in which he says he tried to win the whole time, but neglect the little thing about the signed confession stating otherwise. Well, which are we to believe?

 

Really, I care little about Joe Jackson. Do I think he threw the Series? Yes, I do. If Jerome Holtzman is to believed, and I see no reason why he shouldn't be, Jackson admitted to doing things to help the Sox lose. Jackson demanded $20,000 for his role in the scheme. With Joe Jackson being the darling of revisionist historians, why would he stick to his stand that Jackson's guilty if it were built upon lies and fairy tales? Certainly not to enhance his popularity.

 

And your mention of the movie Eight Men Out, I never have and never would use a movie as a source concerning the Black Sox. The movie takes great liberty with timelines. For instance, it doesn't show how the 7 Sox players that actively threw the Series also continued to throw games through 1920. But I guess that is made up too, since I read it in Eight Men Out.

[elrockinMT]

Nellie Fox is my choice. Nellie was as steady in the field as any player we have seen in this org. He was a sparkplug and could handle the bat. Here is a fellow that would get over 600 AB's a season and strikeout less than 20 times. He was an all-star and in the hall of fame.

[LDF]

Here's a quote from the Cincinnati Post, attributed to Jerome Holtzman...

 

Holtzman disagreed. "Close inspection of the play-by-play shows that he left about 10 men in scoring position in the first four games," he said. "He got all his RBI in the last four games and hit the home run in the last game. And he admitted to (reporters for) both the Associated Press and United Press on the steps of the courthouse that he was purposely slow in fielding, that he threw to the wrong base, that Cincinnati got some runs they wouldn't have because of his slow fielding."

 

In Holtzman's estimation, "If anyone deserves to be restored, it is Buck Weaver." The third baseman "sat in on the meeting but didn't take part (in the conspiracy)."

 

I believe I read this first hand in Eight Men Out by Eliot Asinof, but can't seem to find the page right now.

 

Or another quote from Eight Men Out...

 

"All week, Joe Jackson had been a disappointment to himself, playing ball with only a part of himself working. He tried to hit, he didn't try to hit. Half the time, he didn't know whether he was trying or not. He had taken only one real vicious cut at the ball with his famous black bat and conveniently failed to make contact. The $5,000 Lefty Williams had handed him in that old envelope was part payment for his lethargy."

 

Eight Men Out makes no mention of Jackson warning anyone BEFORE the Series began. Afterwards maybe, but not before. Before the Series began, Jackson demanded $20,000 for his role. Hardly a good sign. If guilt after the fact, or even during the Series got to him, that hardly makes him innocent.

ok, let me see if i got this right, a book which is nothing but a book say all this and it is gospel. the court reports of the case says some thing different............ ummmmm

 

the grand jury accounts mean nothing, a second trial agains means nothing. right.

 

and holtzman who was not there at the time say all this, and this guy should be believe b/c of what, his intergity and he has no other reason into this.

 

well for 19.95 you and everyone can buy the jerome holtzman book where in addition to you you wrote, you neglected to add this little paragraph, and of course he would not lie or misread or mishear anything right.

 

>>> According to newspaper reports, apparently leaked by the prosecution, Jackson also confessed his guilt in testimony to the grand jury. But in the official grand jury transcript, which Frommer located through a librarian in Greenville and included in his book, Jackson said nothing of the sort. Indeed, under oath, he testified that he did not attend the meeting in a New York hotel during which other players agreed to throw the Series and was told by Gandil that the fix was in regardless of whether Jackson went along. "I tried to win all the time," Jackson said.

 

and for those who want to look at the site in which what his name only took a paragraph to support his claim, here it is

 

http://www.cincypost.com/2003/02/25/rose02...02-25-2003.html

 

so i want to see this actual artilce of these two writers who name can't be found or verified.

 

show me the actual reporters link that states that. the yr is 1920, not something that is made up or recreated many years later.

 

let see, actual invesitagated reports say something else, all the case reports say something else, everything that was reported says something else, but we should not believe this b/c of one reporter who listen to old tapes say according to his opinion it doesn't wash. only one person opinions after soooo many others opinions neve said anything else, of course you could read it in a 19.95 book by holtzman. but selling a book was furtherest from his mind right.

 

lets see, in 8 men out, it showed pitcher Eddie Cicotte did not get the bonus that was promise him, if he reach 30 wins. the yr was suppose to be 1919, however that happen to 1917 accoding to baseball library.

 

 

ref to the game by game account, well look at this

 

http://www.blackbetsy.com/19atbat.htm

 

every at bat for joe during the series of 1919 against the reds.

Now let me get this straight. I shouldn't believe Jerome Holtzman or Eliot Asinof because, according to you, they're trying to sell books, but I should believe Shoeless Joe Jackson while he's on trial for fixing the Series? Wait, what's that? Joe said he tried to win all the time? Well, hell's bells!! He's innocent!

 

I didn't "neglect" to add anything, and yes, I used one paragraph from the article, because frankly, I don't have hours to do research to prove what's already been proven, that Joe Jackson threw the World Series. You're right, the trial and grand jury finding don't mean much. That trial was such a farce, that it is used as evidence of innocence is laughable. You point to a grand jury testimonial in which he says he tried to win the whole time, but neglect the little thing about the signed confession stating otherwise. Well, which are we to believe?

 

Really, I care little about Joe Jackson. Do I think he threw the Series? Yes, I do. If Jerome Holtzman is to believed, and I see no reason why he shouldn't be, Jackson admitted to doing things to help the Sox lose. Jackson demanded $20,000 for his role in the scheme. With Joe Jackson being the darling of revisionist historians, why would he stick to his stand that Jackson's guilty if it were built upon lies and fairy tales? Certainly not to enhance his popularity.

 

And your mention of the movie Eight Men Out, I never have and never would use a movie as a source concerning the Black Sox. The movie takes great liberty with timelines. For instance, it doesn't show how the 7 Sox players that actively threw the Series also continued to throw games through 1920. But I guess that is made up too, since I read it in Eight Men Out.

get real look at your post you were the one who mention 8 men out, not i. i just pointed out something else that was different.

 

i have never heard or read anything about 20,000 so unless you can produce a link to back up this new info, i am not going to even respond to new stuff. did anyone else ever heard of this?

 

answer me this, why would joe go to comiskey before the series started, and try to tell him this?

 

ref to whether he threw it or not, i really don't believe he did or tried to, and i don't believe that weaver did either.

[IlliniBob72]

Here's a quote from the Cincinnati Post, attributed to Jerome Holtzman...

 

Holtzman disagreed. "Close inspection of the play-by-play shows that he left about 10 men in scoring position in the first four games," he said. "He got all his RBI in the last four games and hit the home run in the last game. And he admitted to (reporters for) both the Associated Press and United Press on the steps of the courthouse that he was purposely slow in fielding, that he threw to the wrong base, that Cincinnati got some runs they wouldn't have because of his slow fielding."

 

In Holtzman's estimation, "If anyone deserves to be restored, it is Buck Weaver." The third baseman "sat in on the meeting but didn't take part (in the conspiracy)."

 

I believe I read this first hand in Eight Men Out by Eliot Asinof, but can't seem to find the page right now.

 

Or another quote from Eight Men Out...

 

"All week, Joe Jackson had been a disappointment to himself, playing ball with only a part of himself working. He tried to hit, he didn't try to hit. Half the time, he didn't know whether he was trying or not. He had taken only one real vicious cut at the ball with his famous black bat and conveniently failed to make contact. The $5,000 Lefty Williams had handed him in that old envelope was part payment for his lethargy."

 

Eight Men Out makes no mention of Jackson warning anyone BEFORE the Series began. Afterwards maybe, but not before. Before the Series began, Jackson demanded $20,000 for his role. Hardly a good sign. If guilt after the fact, or even during the Series got to him, that hardly makes him innocent.

ok, let me see if i got this right, a book which is nothing but a book say all this and it is gospel. the court reports of the case says some thing different............ ummmmm

 

the grand jury accounts mean nothing, a second trial agains means nothing. right.

 

and holtzman who was not there at the time say all this, and this guy should be believe b/c of what, his intergity and he has no other reason into this.

 

well for 19.95 you and everyone can buy the jerome holtzman book where in addition to you you wrote, you neglected to add this little paragraph, and of course he would not lie or misread or mishear anything right.

 

>>> According to newspaper reports, apparently leaked by the prosecution, Jackson also confessed his guilt in testimony to the grand jury. But in the official grand jury transcript, which Frommer located through a librarian in Greenville and included in his book, Jackson said nothing of the sort. Indeed, under oath, he testified that he did not attend the meeting in a New York hotel during which other players agreed to throw the Series and was told by Gandil that the fix was in regardless of whether Jackson went along. "I tried to win all the time," Jackson said.

 

and for those who want to look at the site in which what his name only took a paragraph to support his claim, here it is

 

http://www.cincypost.com/2003/02/25/rose02...02-25-2003.html

 

so i want to see this actual artilce of these two writers who name can't be found or verified.

 

show me the actual reporters link that states that. the yr is 1920, not something that is made up or recreated many years later.

 

let see, actual invesitagated reports say something else, all the case reports say something else, everything that was reported says something else, but we should not believe this b/c of one reporter who listen to old tapes say according to his opinion it doesn't wash. only one person opinions after soooo many others opinions neve said anything else, of course you could read it in a 19.95 book by holtzman. but selling a book was furtherest from his mind right.

 

lets see, in 8 men out, it showed pitcher Eddie Cicotte did not get the bonus that was promise him, if he reach 30 wins. the yr was suppose to be 1919, however that happen to 1917 accoding to baseball library.

 

 

ref to the game by game account, well look at this

 

http://www.blackbetsy.com/19atbat.htm

 

every at bat for joe during the series of 1919 against the reds.

Now let me get this straight. I shouldn't believe Jerome Holtzman or Eliot Asinof because, according to you, they're trying to sell books, but I should believe Shoeless Joe Jackson while he's on trial for fixing the Series? Wait, what's that? Joe said he tried to win all the time? Well, hell's bells!! He's innocent!

 

I didn't "neglect" to add anything, and yes, I used one paragraph from the article, because frankly, I don't have hours to do research to prove what's already been proven, that Joe Jackson threw the World Series. You're right, the trial and grand jury finding don't mean much. That trial was such a farce, that it is used as evidence of innocence is laughable. You point to a grand jury testimonial in which he says he tried to win the whole time, but neglect the little thing about the signed confession stating otherwise. Well, which are we to believe?

 

Really, I care little about Joe Jackson. Do I think he threw the Series? Yes, I do. If Jerome Holtzman is to believed, and I see no reason why he shouldn't be, Jackson admitted to doing things to help the Sox lose. Jackson demanded $20,000 for his role in the scheme. With Joe Jackson being the darling of revisionist historians, why would he stick to his stand that Jackson's guilty if it were built upon lies and fairy tales? Certainly not to enhance his popularity.

 

And your mention of the movie Eight Men Out, I never have and never would use a movie as a source concerning the Black Sox. The movie takes great liberty with timelines. For instance, it doesn't show how the 7 Sox players that actively threw the Series also continued to throw games through 1920. But I guess that is made up too, since I read it in Eight Men Out.

get real look at your post you were the one who mention 8 men out, not i. i just pointed out something else that was different.

 

i have never heard or read anything about 20,000 so unless you can produce a link to back up this new info, i am not going to even respond to new stuff. did anyone else ever heard of this?

 

answer me this, why would joe go to comiskey before the series started, and try to tell him this?

 

ref to whether he threw it or not, i really don't believe he did or tried to, and i don't believe that weaver did either.

No s*** I mentioned Eight Men Out. You said, "a book which is nothing but a book say all this and it is gospel. the court reports of the case says some thing different............ ummmmm". I think the book is an excellent source. You seem to pooh-pooh it. I'm sure a hell of a lot more research went into that book than any of these precious websites you keep refering to. And I can't provide you a link about the $20,000. I'll do you one better. A book. Page 34 of the book Eight Men Out...

 

"Gandil was nervous. He saw himself having trouble from all sides, not the least of which would be the ballplayers. Here was Lefty Williams saying he didn't want anything to do with the deal. Gandil told him he was a sucker: they were going ahead with it regardless. And when he cornered Jackson, the big Southerner insisted on getting $20,000 for his participation. Since Gandil needed him, he was forced to agree to it. And what was going on in Buck Weaver's head?"

 

As for your claim that he tried to tell Comiskey BEFORE the Series, I've never heard that nor read it. He told Kid Gleason he didn't want to play and that he could tell Comiskey, but that's not the same as what you're claiming.

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe Eight Men Out is the Bible on the subject, but it's probably a lot more factual and unbiased than any of these "Canonize Joe Jackson!" websites. It seems like the greatest evidence people use of Jackson's innocence is his performance in the Series. Seems natural enough, no? A player can still hit .375 or score 40 points and still throw a game. A two-out single isn't much risk of turning a game. A solo home run when down 11-1 is pretty safe. Not getting to a ball doesn't show as an error. Neither does throwing to the wrong base. Demanding money, receiving money, keeping money...sounds like the recipe of a fix if you ask me.

[LDF]

give me another link beside a book

 

just b/c a book says it, doesn't make it correct.

 

i am still doubting your source of the 20.000. wow a book.

 

even in your precious jerome article, it states that joe went to comiskey to give him the money the day after he was given it.

 

if he was guilty why would he do this.

[clujer420]

give me another link beside a book

 

just b/c a book says it, doesn't make it correct.

 

i am still doubting your source of the 20.000. wow a book.

 

even in your precious jerome article, it states that joe went to comiskey to give him the money the day after he was given it.

 

if he was guilty why would he do this.

Books are MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more credible resources than internet websites. Websites are often not liable for slanderous comments or reporting false information (unless it's connected to a corporation or something like that, such as ESPN), while a book is.