MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089562641 · doi:10.1353/nin.0.0016

The Arrival of the American League: Ban Johnson and the 1901 Challenge to National League Monopoly (review)

2008· article· en· W2089562641 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNine · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmerican Sports and Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeagueMonopolyPolitical scienceEconomic historyCompetition (biology)LawManagementEconomicsMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: The Arrival of the American League: Ban Johnson and the 1901 Challenge to National League Monopoly Harry Jebsen Jr Warren N. Wilbert. The Arrival of the American League: Ban Johnson and the 1901 Challenge to National League Monopoly. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2007. 240 pp. Paper, $29.95. In the heady entrepreneurial days of 1900, when the extremes of business competition and the vastness of trust activity seemed rampant, Ban Johnson and his confederates—most notably, Charles Comiskey—dove into the stormy waters to challenge the supremacy of the National League. Other challengers had tried in the 1880s and early 1890s to break the strangle-hold that the Spalding-controlled league had on baseball—the American Association, the Union Association, and the Players League attempted to join the upper echelons in the baseball business but had not been successful in their challenges. The American League, according to Wilbert, was successful in their efforts of 1900, 1901, and 1902 due to divisions within the National League, league president Nicholas Young’s poor leadership, and the brash, self-confident, and well-orchestrated efforts of Johnson, as well as Comiskey, Connie Mack, and Charles Somers—all of whom recognized the opportunity to profit by aligning the American League with the older league and placing it in a position to be a business success. Wilbert helps readers to better understand the dynamics of this move: the critical importance of relocating Western League franchises in National League cities in 1900 and the transformation of the Western League into the American League with major-league status. While much of this transformation was symbolic, by 1901 it included raiding the National League of much of its strong talent and some of its leadership. Clark Griffith’s move from the west to the south side of Chicago and Napoleon Lajoie’s leap in Philadelphia [End Page 146] from the National League to the American League and then on to Cleveland provided pillars for an emerging institution. Wilbert also handles the tempestuous relationship between Johnson and the difficult John McGraw, whose Baltimore franchise gave the conservative Johnson more headaches than all the other franchises combined. The reader gets a good picture of Johnson and his goals, a decent understanding of New York’s central role in stabilizing the new venture, and less successful portraits of the parts played by Comiskey, Somers, and Griffith in making this venture permanent. Simply structured in a chronological fashion, each chapter is divided into two parts: the first outlines the most important events on the field, as the American League staged good races in each of its first three years, while the second part follows a chronological picture of games, play movements, and critical events in the founding of the American League and in its eventual acceptance as a partner by the National League. Copyright © 2008 the University of Nebraska Press

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it