If a player plays 20 years, with many more AB's, and "Breaks" a record, with many more AB's, is that really fair to the record holder?
2007-07-04 10:15:14 · 6 answers · asked by David S 1 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Yes it is fair. A major part of a player's career is his ability to stay injury free. Look at Cal Ripken and what he was able to do throughout his career. Those that are able to play everyday are rewarded with extra at bats and more opportunity to put up bigger numbers than others. Those players should get a big pat on the back for their accomplishments. Remember, The objective for a player is to help his team win games and you can't do that when you are not playing.
2007-07-04 10:23:05 · answer #1 · answered by Frizzer 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think it's fair. That means you conditioned your body better than that former player. Why did the Babe get less at-bats then the other two? He ate hotdogs and drank beer, and smoked cigars. Hell he'd even go to the hot dog vendor during games. Aaron got many more ABs cause he was in better shape. On the other side though you have to looking at healing regiments as baseball players get better equipment to soak there bones. Bonds has it better than Aaron, Aaron had it better than Ruth. But I mean technology is what it is. So in the end yes I think that it is fair, a raw deal in the end, but still fair.
2007-07-04 17:25:28 · answer #2 · answered by generation_x1228 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe the MLB should have a HR per AB record, with a minimun number of AB.
Ruth had a HR every 11.76 AB,
Aaron had a HR every 16.38 AB &
Bonds has a HR every 12.92 AB.
2007-07-04 17:22:53 · answer #3 · answered by arq_salinaspola 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Is it fair that Ruth never had to face a relief pitcher? Is it fair he never had to hit a breaking pitch of any kind? Is it fair that he never faced a pitcher of color (in an official mlb at-bat)? If we start placing qualifiers on accomplishments, where will it stop?
2007-07-08 16:12:26 · answer #4 · answered by jonathan t 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It never seemed right to me either. But I guess you could say that it's a feat that the record breaker was able to play more games.
However, I do believe that records should be counted by home runs per at bats, or RBI's per at bats, or saves per save opp's
2007-07-04 17:29:55 · answer #5 · answered by MLBfreek35 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it doesn't really matter Babe Ruth is still considered the greatest. Bonds will always be known has a cheater.
2007-07-04 17:22:22 · answer #6 · answered by Dodgerblue 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋