MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321354327 · doi:10.1353/nin.2023.0020

Swing and a Hit: Nine Innings of What Baseball Taught Me by Paul O’Neill and Jack Curry

2023· article· en· W4321354327 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anna R. Newton

Bibliographic record

VenueNine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmerican Sports and Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeagueArtCompetition (biology)PsychologyArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Swing and a Hit: Nine Innings of What Baseball Taught Me by Paul O’Neill and Jack Curry Anna R. Newton Paul O’Neill and Jack Curry. Swing and a Hit: Nine Innings of What Baseball Taught Me. New York: Hachette Book Group, 2002. 247 pp. Paperback, $29.00. Paul O’Neill’s book is a clear, concise retelling of his baseball-player career. He played for Cincinnati from 1985 to 1992 and the Yankees from 1993 to 2001. He begins by describing the influence of his father “for every at bat” (2) of his major league career. He credits his drive and focus for playing well to his competition with his four older brothers for any playing time at all. While the book is purportedly a story in nine innings, the information quickly becomes rather repetitious across all the chapters. The authors thoroughly dissect the art and science of hitting as O’Neill understands and deployed it. Additionally, O’Neill discusses the impact of his personality in the dugout and on the team. Pete Rose describes O’Neill as “one of the most competitive guys I ever managed” (20), while Paul describes himself as playing with intensity and obsessive about being prepared (75). He is enthusiastic about his idols in baseball and spends a lot of time describing their approaches to the game. He singles out Derek Jeter, Bernie Williams, Randy Johnson, and Joe Torre. In his encounters with these heroes as well as teammates he describes his takeaway from his analysis of the player. He offers his opinions of other players’ skills, approaches to playing, and personalities. The “Extra Innings” final chapter covers O’Neill’s seven pieces of advice for young hitters. This is the most rewarding part of the book as he clearly describes his approach to his career in the form of advice for ballplayers. It is a rather humanizing aspect of his personality and impacts the value for the reader. This chapter is where we learn best what baseball taught Paul O’Neill. The book is a detailed retelling of his playing career. The nine plus one innings/chapters of the book could benefit from some larger context information [End Page 137] about the world of baseball and how it has morphed over the seventeen years that he played. His only reference to events happening outside baseball is a brief discussion of the impact of the 9/11 attacks on the New York fans, the schedule, and a short statement about being a “changed person” (211). In spite of his acknowledged tight focus and disciplined approach to playing as well as his outbursts on the field, O’Neill describes himself as a reserved person (198). He was genuinely surprised when the Yankees honored him with a plaque in their Monument Park in 2014. The last pages of his story where he describes his emotions on the day of the plaque presentation are the warmest and most human in the entire book. His stated reserved personality prevents his story from being as compelling as it could be. The book could be a richer story and have greater impact with more personal and worldview details about O’Neill’s larger world of baseball as a sport and the times during which he played; however, it does provide insight from one of the game’s more consistent players from the 1990s. Copyright © 2023 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0630.030

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNineSame topicAmerican Sports and LiteratureFrench-language works237,207