Pete Rose finally admitted to gambling on baseball including placing bets on the Reds to win. The Dowd Report states that he did not bet on the Reds to win all of the time which is just as bad as betting on them to lose as far as I'm concerned. Let's say, hypothetically, the Reds and Cards have a 3 game series coming up. Rose bets on the Reds to win games 2 and 3 but doesn't put any money on game 1. You don't think he will be saving his bullpen a bit for games 2 and 3? You don't think he would give his ailing catcher or 2nd baseman an extra day of rest for games 2 and 3 where his money is? Rose apologists using "he never bet against the Reds" need to get a much better excuse. Agree?
2007-11-19
07:46:24
·
7 answers
·
asked by
suspendedagain300
6
in
Baseball