MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151351425 · doi:10.1353/nin.2007.0004

Judge Landis Takes a Different Approach: The 1917 Fixing Scandal between the Detroit Tigers and the Chicago White Sox

2007· article· en· W2151351425 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 · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmerican Sports and Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeagueWhite (mutation)PopularityWildnessPolitical sciencePsychologyHistorySocial psychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Judge Landis Takes a Different Approach:The 1917 Fixing Scandal between the Detroit Tigers and the Chicago White Sox Lowell L. Blaisdell (bio) The early twenty-first century witnessed the arrival of a new major headache for baseball, namely, evidence that some players had turned to steroids as performance enhancers. Nearly a century earlier, baseball had to deal with scandals concerning the likelihood that games were not fairly contested and had prefabricated winners and losers.1 Both problems share the difficulty of locating convincing evidence of guilt, and they both also offer insight into baseball's ability to regulate itself.2 Fixing cases also raise the specter of the game's reduced popularity. Proving a fix is, obviously, difficult without confessions from the participants. However, exceptionally inept play—out of keeping with the players' or the team's normal performance—arouses suspicion. In the Deadball Era, the pitchers and catchers were most easily able to affect game results through unusual wildness, extreme ineffectiveness, and—in the case of catching—allowing wholesale larceny to opposing base runners. Lastly, the existence of a monetary or psychological motive for playing less than one's best added a powerful reason to fear chicanery.3 Over the Labor Day weekend of 1917, a series took place in Chicago between the White Sox and the Detroit Tigers that raised a host of questions much later. The games had an important bearing on the American League race. At the start of the series, the White Sox had a three-and-a-half-game lead on the Boston Red Sox—comforting, but by no means safe. The White Sox went on to sweep the series with Detroit, winding up six and a half in front of Boston and close to home free for the pennant.4 In late December 1926, the two leading, banished conspirators of the fixed 1919 World Series, Chick Gandil and Swede Risberg, emerged from their exile to announce that the 1917 White Sox–Tigers Labor Day weekend series had been rigged. At the end of that season, the Sox [End Page 32] players had presented a payoff to their Labor Day opponents. The cache was distributed seven ways among the Tiger players.5 To handle the problem that the two exiles had raised, baseball's first commissioner, retired federal judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis, convened a set of hearings over several days in Chicago, to which he summoned thirty-five or more players and ex-players from the two teams. The White Sox manager of 1917, Pants Rowland, and his former coach, Kid Gleason, were also in attendance.6 Landis served not only as judge but also as prosecutor, defense attorney, and jury. How these functions were defined, he alone decided. Further, the evidence consisted of oral testimony only. When the hearings began, Risberg, the instigator of the crisis, spoke first. On January 1, 1927, he recited his story in Landis's office; in addition to the commissioner, a dozen reporters and fellow "Black Sox" Buck Weaver were present. As Risberg told his tale, Weaver nodded in agreement to most of what he had to say.7 On January 5, during the public hearings that followed, Risberg repeated his account with all the other invitees present. Gandil first submitted a sworn affidavit, which was printed in the Chicago Tribune, and on January 6 he offered his testimony with all of the others present.8 Risberg, who had an impetuous disposition, easily exaggerated and jumped to conclusions. In contrast Gandil testified matter-of-factly and offered a plentitude of details that, when put into context, rang with authenticity. Moreover, among the many witnesses, Gandil alone conceded that he might be in error regarding some of the details and allowed for various shades of understanding and intention. "Sloughed Off" The gist of the accusations was that the Tigers had deliberately "sloughed off" the two doubleheaders played on September 2–3 and that the White Sox players knew or strongly suspected that their opponents were playing with unbelievable ineptitude. At the season's end, nearly all of the Pale Hose contributed to a purse of about $850 for their nominal foes. The two accusers made conflicting statements. For...

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.736
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.190 · 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