1951 and 2001: Which is worse?

[LouGehrig]

The depth of despair of Dodgers fans for 1951 is understandable, but it leads to a question of values.

The Dodgers lost the PENNANT. The Giants won the pennant but lost the WORLD SERIES. As a Yankees fan, I am more familar with WINNING and LOSING World Series than fans of any other team.

My opinion is that the Giants were the bigger losers. I say that after living through the 1960 and 2001 World Series. It is acknowledged that to get a chance to win, there must be the chance the to lose. Is the loser of the World Series the ultimate loser of a particular season?

Who were the bigger losers in 1951, the Dodgers or the Giants?

[shlevine42]

There’s really only one answer…at least on THIS Forum!

Nothing the Giants suffered in their Series loss could begin to equal the despair felt by the Dodgers and their fans.

We lost the pennant after having had a huge lead. We lost it in the 9th inning of the final playoff game.

Worst of all, we lost it to THE GIANTS!

It doesn’t get any worse than that.

[LouGehrig]

Would it have been better to beat the Giants but then lose to the Yankees? Do (did) most Dodgers fans want to beat the Giants more than they wanted to beat the Yankees?

[donzblock]

It would have been better to beat the Giants because the Dodgers of 1951 would not have lost the Series.

[shlevine42]

The short answer to your question can be found in the fact that that one loss to the Giants overshadows all the Series losses to the Yankees.

On the positive side, NOTHING was sweeter to a Dodgers fan than beating the Giants.

It goes back to at least 1934, when Bill Terry asked, "Brooklyn? Are they still in the league?" and the Dodgers answered by knocking the Giants out of the pennant on the last weekend of the season.

The hatred felt by the two teams (and their fans) intensified when Durocher became the Giants manager in '48.

The NEXT best feeling was beating the Yankees.

[LouGehrig]

Stating that the Dodgers would have beaten the 1951 is illogical since the Yankees beat the team that beat the Dodgers. But that is the fascination of baseball and life. It could have happened.

While I think the Yankees would have beaten the Dodgers, there are no guarantees. The Dodgers might have won, but they might have lost. All that matters is that the Yankees won.

[donzblock]

Mr. Gehrig, you are sounding like Spock. All that matters is not that the Yankees won: it is that the Dodgers lost!

[jaykay]

Dear Mr. Gehrig:

Surely we can agree that your citing the years 1960 and 2001 indicates that much depends on HOW your team loses. After all, those were not the only years in which the Yankees finished second in the World Series.

Perhaps no Yankees fan could ever identify with the wormwood of 1951, but I guarantee that your friendly rivals in Boston can. It's all a matter of perspective. So allow me to conclude this brief missive by calling your attention to the nectar sipped by Dodgers fans in 1955 when the Bums beat the Giants AND the Yankees. How about that?

[researcher]

[updated:LAST EDITED ON Apr-02-02 AT 10:41 PM (EST)]1934: After winning the first gm of a Dbl Header in Boston 8-0 on 9/23
......the Giants were 3 1/2 games ahead of St.Louis.

......NY went on to lose their last 5 games, while the Cards went 6-0.
......to finish 2 games ahead of NY.

......On sat 9/29 Van Mungo (17-18) beat Parmelee (10-5)5-1; then on
......sun 9/30 21 y/o Johnny Babich (7-11)and Ray Benge(13-12) teamed
......up to beat Freddie Fitzsimmons (18-13) 8-5.

[LouGehrig]

That is great. Fantastic. I love it. You are right. I concede. Completely.

[LouGehrig]

You are right.

[Paulmcall1]

The defeat of fifty years ago has had time to marinate in the
juices of time.
It has turned into a fine whine.
Recent defeats have not had enough time to fester and cause
a lifetime of pain.

[LouGehrig]

Losing does not have to marinate
For the loss to really grate.

To come so close and then to fail
Makes the 26 other victories
A little stale.

[Berky34]

I was a Yankee fan growing up in a Brooklyn neighborhood and I can say without fear of any contradiction that October 2, 1951 was The Penultimate Day of Infamy indelibly etched into the psyches of every Dodger fan from that era. By comparison, all other Dodger heartbreaks--from Mickey Owen to Tommy Henrich to Don Larsen--diminish in significance.

[donzblock]

If October 2, 1951, was the penultimate day of infamy for Dodger fans, what was the antepenultimate, and what was the Ultimate? October 2, 1951, to me, was The Ultimate Day of Infamy.

[The Real McCoy]

What is it about July that turns it into Hoople Month? Next in line is a "Yankee fan growing up in Brooklyn" (shades of Guiliani) who might share with us, whether, like the former Mayor, his "penultimate" dream was to become a Yankee mascot.

Its hard to describe how heartwarming it is to hear from Yankee fans as they describe "without fear of contradiction" what Dodger fans are really feeling. I'm going out on a limb here, but the only thing missing from this message was some cute little "mega ditto" reference. Unless I miss my guess, we may have heard from the "penultimate" Limbaugh listener. The tortured syntax fits.

[Berky34]

Until such time as you unilaterally repeal the First Amendment, I'll listen to whoever I please, be it Limbaugh or anyone else.

The fact is that I've known more Dodger fans than you have friends who undoubtedly have their annual convention in an Ocean Parkway phone booth.

I also once knew a Yankee fan who became a Dodger fan and he raised the average IQ in both fan groups.

[The Real McCoy]

Of course you can listen to "whoever I please" and let me guess could that "anyone else" be anyone but Sean Hannity. Now there's a 7/8 quinella.

So you know that phone booth on Ocean Parkway? Well, you gotta admit it is a little bit larger than average.

Give some thought to updating your material; that IQ line was old when we tossed Nixon out.

Thanks for the quick response.

[shlevine42]

Gentlemen, gentlemen...let's keep our eye on the linguistic ball here.

I'll grant that in some Brooklyn neighborhoods, "penultimate" might have been used to describe the lifetime sentences handed out to the local criminals, but in polite society, it means "NEXT to last."

Thus, on October 2, 1951 -- the "penultimate" game of the season -- we were on the long end of Labine's 10-0 shutout of the Giants.

The ULTIMATE "day of infamy" was October 3, 1951.

[LouGehrig]

Are you still a Yankees fan? If you had advance information last year, would you have rather lost to Oakland or Seattle rather than get to the WS and lose? I would.

[donzblock]

Golly, gee, Berky 34, you're really a scary fellow. Did all of your Dodger friends teach you how to write a sentence? And which one of your Yankee friends taught you the meaning of "penultimate"?

[ed reulbach]

"Lou"--buck up, old chap! As a Lou Gehrig fan from way back, I can't imagine the real Lou Gehrig ever saying something like that. I also think most Oakland or Seattle fans would rather have had their team win the pennant than not. (This is not the place to ask them, however, so I won't.)

If you still feel this badly about your team not winning its 27th World Championship (and fourth straight), perhaps you should seek out (or found) a 2001 Yankee fans' support group in your area, where you might expect to get more sympathy than in a Brooklyn Dodgers forum. Let me know how it works out.--"ed"

[LouGehrig]

[updated:LAST EDITED ON Jul-25-02 AT 10:44 PM (EDT)]Thank you for your suggestions, but I am still trying to recover from 1960. I recognize that I am in the minority, but that is my feeling. As Frank sang, "All, or nothing at all."

It was interesting to hear Bob Gibson, whom we saw at an autograph show during the winter, disagree completely with me. He said the level of competition is so great, just getting to the WS is a great accomplishment.


I do not read and write on this forum for sympathy. Yankees fans do not need sympathy, do not want sympathy, and do not give sympathy.

It is just that this is one of the best, if not best forums of all and the participants are quite expert.

We are not dealing with amateurs.

[Bum Iz]

Go Bums!!!

Yankees fans do not sympathy???????????
These Yankee fans, is English their primary language?

[ed reulbach]

> Yankees fans do not . . . want sympathy, and do not give
>sympathy.

Oh come on now, you're not all like that! This is just playing into the old stereotype of the stone-hearted Yankees fan. I'm tempted to do that sometimes myself, but I know better. My best friend from college is a Yankees fan, and he is one of the most sympathetic guys I know.

>It is just that this is one of the best, if not best forums
>of all and the participants are quite expert.

I'm sure we all appreciate (and agree with) that, but let me ask you honestly: If two (or three or four or five or . . .) Yankees fans start commiserating with each other over Yankees losses here, do you really think that would be the best thing for this *Brooklyn* forum that you so obviously appreciate and, in my own opinion, have contributed to positively? This may be overreacting, but we've had an above-average share of off-topic contributions lately and I'd just like to discourage this before it reaches critical mass.

We have also had more than our share of heated discussion here lately, and I'm afraid I might be getting more heated here myself than I'd like. While in my "ed" persona I do try to assume a mildness of temperament befitting someone who has been resting in a cool tomb for forty-one years . . . so all I can say is, I'm sure your preference for losing the pennant over losing the W.S. is entirely comprehensible for a person with your unique perspective and life experiences. How refreshing to hear another point of view from that of Bob Gibson, as intense a competitor as ever lived, and certainly no amateur--but if we all felt the same about these things, what a dreadfully dull world it would be. If you would prefer (and I am not saying you would) that the '01 Yanks had gone 70-90 and gotten their bubble-bursting out of the way . . . follow your bliss, man.

"ed" :-)

[shlevine42]

Lou – I won’t insult you by offering sympathy, but in the spirit of baseball fellowship, be assured that we do feel your pain.

After all, we have Thomson. And you have Mazeroski.

We have Owen. And you have Mazeroski.

We have Henrich. And you have Mazeroski.

We have Ashburn. And you have Mazeroski.

We have Sisler. And you have Mazeroski.

WE LOST OUR TEAM! And you have Mazeroski.

Count your blessings, pal.

[LouGehrig]

US Yankees fans spel gud, rite beta, and even reed a litle. Some of us are senile so we forget---like a word.

[LouGehrig]

The point of my original post was not to create a thread for fans to commiserate with each other. I am in a small minority (including Joe Thiesmann and John Madden)that believes the only winner in a season is the team that wins the WS or, in the cases of Thiesmann and Madden, the Super Bowl.

Bobby Thomson's HR is one of the most famous, significant of all. No better sample exists to question about a tough defeat than the fans of the team against whom he hit the HR.

If they could have won the pennant but lost the WS to the Yankees in 1951, would they consider it to be a positive?

I find it amazing that the Buffalo Bills are considered to have had great seasons because they REACHED the Superbowl. They never won it. Of course they were a winning team, but they were the biggest losing team in Superbowl history.

It is interesting how many Braves fans lament the fact that they won only one WS since 1991. They wish they had won one or two more and then they would REALLY be considered one of baseball's great dynasties over a decade or more.

I had terribly mixed feeling when Chambliss hit the HR in 1976 because I thought that any team with Stanley and Mason at SS had no chance against the Reds. And yes, I would rather go 71-91 than win the pennant and lose the WS and be a happy loser than win the pennant and lose the last game of the season.

I did not start these tangential discussions, but they must be acknowledged.

[LouGehrig]

This is the best post I have ever read. It is wise and says it all. Thank you.

[donzblock]

I agree with Lou, but Steve is only a Dodger fan, which means that his IQ is lower than that of Berky34, who is a Yankee fan. So perhaps Berky34 would care to top Steve by giving us his definition of "penultimate" and then explaining why Thomson's homer was the penultimate trauma in every Brooklyn Dodger fan's life.

[Bum Iz]

Go Bums!!!

I think Berky34 has gone into the Government's "mentally-challenged" relocation program. Which means he will soon resurface as a Braves fan. Which is the penultimate thing that you would want to be...but at least he will no longer be a Yankee.

[ed reulbach]

[updated:LAST EDITED ON Jul-26-02 AT 04:50 PM (EDT)]Yes, some of the people in the government's relocation program do seem to be "mentally challenged", don't they? Henry Hill (Goodfellas) was often worried that the FBI would let his whereabouts slip to the mob by accident when he was in their program. Henry was a gangster and an informer (neither of which we have any reason to suppose Berky34 to be), not good things to be, either . . . but he grew up in Brooklyn, so we can at least *hope* he was not a Yankee fan.--"ed"

[D6+]

The point of my original post was not to create a thread for fans to commiserate with each other. I am in a small minority (including Joe Thiesmann and John Madden)that believes the only winner in a season is the team that wins the WS or, in the cases of Thiesmann and Madden, the Super Bowl.

Bobby Thomson's HR is one of the most famous, significant of all. No better sample exists to question about a tough defeat than the fans of the team against whom he hit the HR.

If they could have won the pennant but lost the WS to the Yankees in 1951, would they consider it to be a positive?

I find it amazing that the Buffalo Bills are considered to have had great seasons because they REACHED the Superbowl. They never won it. Of course they were a winning team, but they were the biggest losing team in Superbowl history.

It is interesting how many Braves fans lament the fact that they won only one WS since 1991. They wish they had won one or two more and then they would REALLY be considered one of baseball's great dynasties over a decade or more.

I had terribly mixed feeling when Chambliss hit the HR in 1976 because I thought that any team with Stanley and Mason at SS had no chance against the Reds. And yes, I would rather go 71-91 than win the pennant and lose the WS and be a happy loser than win the pennant and lose the last game of the season.

I did not start these tangential discussions, but they must be acknowledged.


We definitely have a different view point on the question you asked. For me, w/o question I rather reach the World Series, Super Bowl, etc, and lose than not have the opportunity to play for the World Championship. The frustration level of those Dodgers fans who experienced the ending of the Dodgers 1951 season probably ranks as # 2 on the frustrating/ devastation meter, only behind when Walter O' Malley hijacked the team to Los Angeles.

Since you expressed your thoughts, the Cubs collapse in the 2003 NLCS occurred. Even if the Cubs would have been swept by the Yankees in the World Series, my guess is the vast majority of fans of that team would have considered the season a success. I certainly would have if I had a rooting interest in the Cubs. Losing to the Florida Marlins......... after being up 3 games to 3-1..........having Game # 6 and # 7 at home..........and blowing a 3-0 lead with one out in the 8th inning of Game # 6, after a fan might have prevented out # 2, arguably was the highest frustration level a fan base experienced in baseball history other than a team moving. Especially since the Cubs haven't even reached a World Series in 1945 and had huge collapses in 1969 and 1984.


Being that the Yankees have had more success than any MLB team, including 4 World Champions since 1996, I can understand why you view the options differently than me and many others. By no means is this a criticism. It's about how previous experiences affect the present.

[musial6]

The Cub collapse in '03 was staggering, of course, but the Phillie folderoo in '64 was even more astonishing (up by 6 1/2 with twelve to play).

[D6+]

It's hard to imagine any Manager that fate was against more, than Gene Mauch. The Angels collapses in 1982 and 1986 can be put in the same sentence as the 51' Dodgers, ' 64 Phillies, '84 Cubs, and of course the 2003 Cubs. Even as a player, Mauch never appeared on a World Series team. He was with the Dodgers in 1944 and 1948 but not during the 1947 season NL Championship season.


Branch Rickey had very high regard for Gene Mauch. According to the following article, Rickey expressed the following:


http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/08/09/sports/MAUCH.php

Mauch was a teenager with the Dodgers when Branch Rickey, the general manager, spotted him as a future manager. "Look at him and you'd think he's 16," Red Smith of The New York Times once recalled Rickey saying. "Talk to him and you think he's 26. Talk baseball with him, and you'd think he's 36."

[callingit]

My opinion is that after the Dodger--Giant playoff series of '51, a World Series loss was ALMOST ( I stress 'almost') irrelevant to the Giants. The best comparison I could draw would be the Yanks beating the Red Sox in Game 7 of the 2003 ALCS, then losing to the Marlins in the WOrld Series. The Yanks real triumph that year was beating the Red Sox so dramatically--losing the WS didn't sting as much after that, it was mostly anti-climactic.


Moving on to the WS in '51 would've meant more to the Dodgers, for after all, they were still seeking their first World Championship at that point, and if they'd managed to hold off the Giants and move on, they most certainly would've had to believe they were the team of destiny for that season.

So '51 for the Dodgers is far worse than '01 for the Yanks. Losing your fourth title in a row doesn't compare to losing your destiny.

[D6+]

callingit, I agree with everything you mentioned with one small technical exception. ;) From my perspective, the Brooklyn Dodgers franchise won 3 World Championships in the latter part of the 19th Century
( 1890- Brooklyn Bridegrooms, 1899- Brooklyn Superbas, 1900- Brooklyn Superbas ) .

[callingit]

callingit, I agree with everything you mentioned with one small technical exception. ;) From my perspective, the Brooklyn Dodgers franchise won 3 World Championships in the latter part of the 19th Century
( 1890- Brooklyn Bridegrooms, 1899- Brooklyn Superbas, 1900- Brooklyn Superbas ) .


everybody's a stickler. :laugh

[LouGehrig]

It would have been better to beat the Giants because the Dodgers of 1951 would not have lost the Series.

That may be true, but it is illogical. Considering the source, I am forced to supspend judgment and be grateful for the series win.

[Ray Mattes]

All of this rhetoric about the 1951 National League Pennant Race begs the question: Was Brooklyn the ultimate melt down team OR were the Giants the ultimate come back team? Ray

[LouGehrig]

Neither, if you've followed recent "developments."

[penncentralpete]

how can it be said that no yankees fan could feel the "wormwood" of the '51 dodgers? didn't the vaunted yanks lose 4 straight to the red sox after being up 3 games to none? wormwood, indeed. as for the '51 world series...........maybe the dodgers would have lost, but they would NOT have been swept in 4 straight as the giants were.. (IMHO). regards, pete trunk, NJ

[musial6]

how can it be said that no yankees fan could feel the "wormwood" of the '51 dodgers? didn't the vaunted yanks lose 4 straight to the red sox after being up 3 games to none? wormwood, indeed. as for the '51 world series...........maybe the dodgers would have lost, but they would NOT have been swept in 4 straight as the giants were.. (IMHO). regards, pete trunk, NJ


Four straight?

[penncentralpete]

in the 2004 AL championship series were not the new york yankees ahead 3 games to zero? did not the bosox (after losing game three 19-8) come off the floor and sweep the bombers in 4 straight games? pete

[D6+]

All of this rhetoric about the 1951 National League Pennant Race begs the question: Was Brooklyn the ultimate melt down team OR were the Giants the ultimate come back team? Ray


IMO, the Giants were the ultimate comeback team. Though the Dodgers certainly cooled down from their torrid pace earlier in the season, the Dodgers would have still won the NL Pennant under practically any other situation than the Giants playing absolute lights out baseball from around mid August on.