PDA

View Full Version : Pete Rose bats were corked



Fon Duc Tow
06-08-2010, 04:22 PM
The folks from Deadspin hit home today with another controversial Pete Rose story.

Did Pete have corked bats? According to photographic evidence, he did. In an in-depth report from Barry Petchesky of Deadspin.com, two X-ray photos of separate Pete Rose model Mizuno PR4192 bats, commissioned by Rose specifically for his 1985 chase of baseballís all-time hits record, have been altered.


http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/2010/06/08/photos-show-pete-rose-bats-corked/


:eek: :confused:

Fon Duc Tow
06-08-2010, 04:29 PM
OK we know he was a jerk.

We know he bet on games he managed.

We know his bats, at least in 1985 season, were corked.

Dude is rapidly approaching "*" territory in my opinion. :thumbdown

Vottomatic
06-08-2010, 04:44 PM
Still gotta swing the bat, make contact, and find a spot for the ball to land.

Doesn't mean anything to me.

Redlegs_87
06-08-2010, 04:47 PM
Corked bats don't help a hitter really besides being able to bring the bat around faster. The ball comes off a corked bat much slower then a regular bat.

Fon Duc Tow
06-08-2010, 04:53 PM
Still gotta swing the bat, make contact, and find a spot for the ball to land.

Doesn't mean anything to me.

"Corked bats don't help power."

"Corked bats just make the bat lighter."

Sounds like there isn't any advantage to be gained from using a corked bat. :thumbup:

...I wonder why people risk getting caught using them?
... Why are they not allowed to be used then?

I agree that it doesn't really mean much at this point. But only because he a screwed up in so many other areas. Sort of like finding out the Enron crew jaywalked too.

I agree too that Pete Rose Way should be renamed. So many other talented Reds without all the baggage.

Barry Larkin Way
Sparky Anderson Way
etc

I hope he doesn't get in until he has long passed away.

*

Vottomatic
06-08-2010, 04:57 PM
He probably used it in '85 because he was getting older and didn't have the bat speed he once did.

bounty37h
06-08-2010, 05:03 PM
I want better proof then deadspin for one, might as well say it was on wikipidia IMO. Not saying it isnt true, but I dont trust them for anything...

Fon Duc Tow
06-08-2010, 05:08 PM
He probably used it in '85 because he was getting older and didn't have the bat speed he once did.

He only beats me when I deserve it. :D

1990REDS
06-08-2010, 05:26 PM
not really surprised that a guy who spent the better part of 20 years lieing to everyone also cheated during his career. say it aint so pete!!!

1990REDS
06-08-2010, 05:28 PM
saying a corked bat doesnt help a hitter is like saying steriods dont help either.

Knightro28
06-08-2010, 05:29 PM
saying a corked bat doesnt help a hitter is like saying steriods dont help either.

It's science. Any speed gained from a corked bat is negated by having a lighter mass.

1990REDS
06-08-2010, 05:34 PM
It's science. Any speed gained from a corked bat is negated by having a lighter mass.

yes i agree, and a corked bat would not help a power hitter like barry bonds or mark mcgwire, but the bat speed would help a singles or gap hitter like pete rose.

1990REDS
06-08-2010, 05:40 PM
you can also cork them at the taperded end of the barrel like sammy sosa did a couple years ago which almost causes a flex motion in the bat when you swing it. in theiry lowing the bat weight without jeoperdizing the mass at the barrel of the bat.

Krawhitham
06-08-2010, 06:09 PM
I would not put it past him, but this is not proof

but how many times has this bat changed hands?

A) Who is to say it is a bat he really used, it would not be hard to make a bat look like one from a picture B) If it is a bat he used it may have been corked after Rose used it just to raise the value of the bat and to get 15 minutes of fame

Krawhitham
06-08-2010, 06:14 PM
It's science. Any speed gained from a corked bat is negated by having a lighter mass.

The ball might not go as far but if you can not make contract without the extra speed if is a fair trade off, he was 45 years old and no longer have the bat speed to hit that ball.


I do not think a corked bat will help you hit more HRs but singles YES it will

Krawhitham
06-08-2010, 06:16 PM
Still gotta swing the bat, make contact, and find a spot for the ball to land.

Doesn't mean anything to me.

and Dusty does not use defensive substitutions changes last in games right?

Reds
06-08-2010, 07:10 PM
I bet this isn't true. Then again, I'm a compulsive gambler.

Kingspoint
06-08-2010, 07:40 PM
There is no proof that a bat "he used in a game" was ever corked.

Vottomatic
06-08-2010, 07:56 PM
and Dusty does not use defensive substitutions changes last in games right?

He stuck Nix in CF as a defensive substitution last week. That's just idiotic.

He never uses Janish as a sub in late innings. That's idiotic too.

Using Heisey a few times doesn't cut it. He should always use him late in games for defense.

lidspinner
06-08-2010, 09:50 PM
im going to try and find the test....but I think it was UCLA, or maybe FSU...anyhow, they did a series of tests back when slamming sammy sosa was caught.....and the results were that a corked bat sent the ball about 20 fet further using the same ball, and the exact same swing....they used a machine of some sort to test the swing, and a pitching machine. Pretty good test and results.I also think the ball jumped off at a higher rate of speed.

Just thought it was interesting, I will see if I can find it anywhere.

FlyerFanatic
06-09-2010, 12:27 AM
isnt it sort of suspicious and throw up red flags if hes getting specially crafted bats just for the hit mark record chase. i mean players get specific weights and maybe brands now a days, but still, pete gets special bats just for the record shady stuff.

Roush's socks
06-09-2010, 01:08 AM
How many pitchers used spit balls or some kind of substance? Baseball has always had cheating, even with the best players. Also, this was in 1985 when Pete was barely holding on. It doesn't mean much to me. Anyone who watched him play knows he was a great player, but history I think will ultimately forget.

Magdal
06-09-2010, 01:23 AM
im going to try and find the test....but I think it was UCLA, or maybe FSU...anyhow, they did a series of tests back when slamming sammy sosa was caught.....and the results were that a corked bat sent the ball about 20 fet further using the same ball, and the exact same swing....they used a machine of some sort to test the swing, and a pitching machine. Pretty good test and results.I also think the ball jumped off at a higher rate of speed.

Just thought it was interesting, I will see if I can find it anywhere.The "Mythbusters" proved otherwise. Sorry, the college kids got it wrong.

arkimadee
06-09-2010, 01:03 PM
I'd say he just used it in "battie pratice"

Red Forman
06-09-2010, 02:00 PM
Dude is rapidly approaching "*" territory in my opinion. :thumbdown


FDT,

Pete has alwayz been a Jagoff...

but, he's Cincy Jagoff!!! :D

Quatitos
06-09-2010, 03:12 PM
The "Mythbusters" proved otherwise. Sorry, the college kids got it wrong.

Since when are the Mythbusters a credible scientific source? I would be more prone to believe the study conducted at a university before believing one conducted by the Mythbusters.

Also, this story in no way proves that Rose used corked bats. At most it could prove he had a corked bat in his possession and might have used it at one point, not that it was used in a game. Also the fact it has been in private possession for so long does not help the credibility that the bat could have been altered by the current owners. I remember reading that the fact it is corked makes it much more valuable, giving a good motive for someone to cork the bat after it came into their possession.

I do not doubt the fact it is completely within Pete's character to cheat in such a way, but this is not very credible proof of that.

Fon Duc Tow
06-09-2010, 03:35 PM
Would any of you vouch for Pete Rose?

bounty37h
06-09-2010, 03:51 PM
^nope, but I wont vouch for deadspin or that report either.

Vottomatic
06-09-2010, 07:47 PM
http://twitter.com/LanceMcAlister

Joe Morgan says Pete didn't use a corked bat. Said it's all just a bunch of b.s.

foxfire123
06-09-2010, 11:07 PM
Since when are the Mythbusters a credible scientific source? I would be more prone to believe the study conducted at a university before believing one conducted by the Mythbusters.


Actually, while Jamie and Adam are just the showmen of the show, there IS a legitimate, REAL scientific staff doing the facts and figures behind their little escapades. I'd be inclined to trust their science.

Quatitos
06-10-2010, 12:42 AM
Actually, while Jamie and Adam are just the showmen of the show, there IS a legitimate, REAL scientific staff doing the facts and figures behind their little escapades. I'd be inclined to trust their science.

As much as you would like to trust it, it does make their method a good one. They are one of the best TV shows in terms of attempting to follow the scientific method, but they are not on par with real scientists and real research. They are first and foremost a TV show, with TV show resources and TV show time restraints.

They have admitted that they can not always follow the scientific method, in fact most times they can't because real science is boring and they don't have the time and money to do it. Real science involves hundreds of experiments and they just can't do that. They readily admit that they are just a TV show striving to be scientific, not one that is actually scientific (because honestly that would not be good TV) so I suggest you take it as what it is, not as anything more.