The glove

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Just a small number of oldies.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Later years.

[AstrosFan]

Good lord. Those early players must have been fielding GENIUSES. Great pics by the way. Thanks, Joe.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Good lord. Those early players must have been fielding GENIUSES. Great pics by the way. Thanks, Joe.

The gloves that came into the game after the 1880s to very early 1900s were really some improvement, a whole different world. But even the gloves in the late 1910s and up to the 1930s were still a long way from the gloves of the late 1940s.

Even some gloves from the late 1930s, early 1940s were a far cry from the gloves that came into the game in the 1950s, more full webbing and the deep well pockets. Bill Doak who pitched for the Cards made a hugh improvement in glove design in 1920, through Rawlings. Just that lace used to attach the first finger and the thumb was a real improvement, precursor to the web in later years. The finishing touch, lacing all the fingers, a whole different world in glove design. It was also a Bill Doak first to treat a new glove with oil, put a ball in the mitt, tie it up for a day or two and it would form a pocket. I can remember my dad showing me the same with my first mitt he bought for me. Most back then used Neats-foot oil.
I would bet that even some of the older posters, what ever that age might be, can remember their first mitt, what model it was.

[CTaka]

Several years ago I bought a hand-made replica of the glove worn by Honus Wagner circa 1915. It looks similar to the Walter Johnson glove (except for color), no string connecting the fingers and just a single leather strap between the first finger and thumb to form the "web". Extremely difficult to catch the ball one-handed; and making any sort of backhand play is near impossible. I can't imagine how those guys could field back in those days.

[BradC34]

Good lord. Those early players must have been fielding GENIUSES. Great pics by the way. Thanks, Joe.

Well you have to understand that pre-1880s the ball could be caught after one bounce and the play was recorded an out. In fact in the early years there were no gloves. However the ball was not as lively and the bats were much heavier. The ball just did not have the speed that it does today. I would fear for my life if I took the field without a glove today, but playing 1860s rules and equipment, it would be the norm.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Well you have to understand that pre-1880s the ball could be caught after one bounce and the play was recorded an out. In fact in the early years there were no gloves. However the ball was not as lively and the bats were much heavier. The ball just did not have the speed that it does today. I would fear for my life if I took the field without a glove today, but playing 1860s rules and equipment, it would be the norm.

I may not have been there to see those games but I don't see it that way.
The ball may not have been live but that doesn't mean it was not hard.

Am I understanding, you say if the ball is caught on one hop it's an out. I don't recall it ever being that case, could be but I don't recall seeing that in the rule book, although changes were frequent in the early years.
Even a one hopper could be hit hard. Even a heavy bat could hit balls hard. What about line drives, balls thrown to bases, hard throws.

The first use of a glove, if you want to call it that was either in 1870 or 1875, 1875 is supposed to be the first documented.

We see this one different, no fun taking the field with no glove, even that long ago, the early years.

[AstrosFan]

Well you have to understand that pre-1880s the ball could be caught after one bounce and the play was recorded an out. In fact in the early years there were no gloves. However the ball was not as lively and the bats were much heavier. The ball just did not have the speed that it does today. I would fear for my life if I took the field without a glove today, but playing 1860s rules and equipment, it would be the norm.

You really need to get to know me better. I know my baseball history quite well, thank you.

***

Joe, if you're interested, there's a discussion site for people into this sort of thing: http://www.vintagebaseballgloveforum.com/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=14&sid=be05296f883963756f7313d6d4fd80b8

[SHOELESSJOE3]

You really need to get to know me better. I know my baseball history quite well, thank you.

***

Joe, if you're interested, there's a discussion site for people into this sort of thing: http://www.vintagebaseballgloveforum.com/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=14&sid=be05296f883963756f7313d6d4fd80b8

Thanks for the tip on that other board. Took a quick look and saved the site, I will visit that site.

[BradC34]

You really need to get to know me better. I know my baseball history quite well, thank you.

I appoligize if I offended you. I didn't mean to come off sounding arrogant. Just wanting to be helpful.


Am I understanding, you say if the ball is caught on one hop it's an out. I don't recall it ever being that case, could be but I don't recall seeing that in the rule book, although changes were frequent in the early years.

The book "But Didn't We Have Fun?" by Peter Morris mentions this several times, but I'm not goign to take the time to thumb through it to find pages. For the sake of speeding up the process I will cite the Vintage Base Ball Association. http://wiki.vbba.org/index.php/Education/RulesAndCustoms

1845 Knickerbocker Rules
Sec. 12
"If a ball be struck, or tipped, and caught, either flying or on the first bound, it is a hand out."

1854 Knickerbocker Rules
Sec. 6
"A ball being struck or tipped and caught, either flying or on the first bound, is a hand out."

1857 National Association of (Amateur) Base Ball Players Rules
Sec. 10
"If three balls are struck at and missed, and the last one is not caught, either flying or upon the first bound, it shall be considered fair, and the striker must attempt to make his run."
Sec. 11
"The striker is out if a foul ball is caught, either before touching the ground or upon the first bound."
Sec. 12
"Or, if three balls are struck at and missed; and the last is caught either before touching the ground or upon the first bound."
Sec.13
"Or, if a fair ball is struck, and the ball is caught either without having touched the ground or upon the first bound."

1858 National Association of (Amateur) Base Ball Players Rules
Sec. 10-13 match above

1860 National Association of (Amateur) Base Ball Players Rules
Sec. 10-13 match above

1860 Beadles Dime Ball Player Rules
Sec. 6
"A ball being struck or tipped, and caught either flying or on the first bound, is a hand out."

1861 National Association of (Amateur) Base Ball Players Rules
Sec. 10-13 match above

1862 National Association of (Amateur) Base Ball Players Rules
Sec. 10-13 match above

1864 National Association of (Amateur) Base Ball Players Rules
Sec. 11-14 correspond to Sec. 10-13 of above rule sets

The change is not made until 1865 when the phrase "upon the first bound" is removed from Section 14 (fair balls) of the 1864 rules. However the phrase is kept for catching foul balls. The 1866, 1867, 1868, 1869 rules on the matter all match the 1865 rules (fair balls must be caught on the fly, foul balls may be caught on the first bound).

In fact the first bound phrase does not totally go away until the 1884 National League of Professional Base Ball Players Rules in which the phrase is not issued for foul balls.

But the VBBA is not my only source. I have read this several places elsewhere. Sure it was only during a brief stint of the early years, but so was soaking the runner which is still very remembered.

Now of course this isn't all to say that it is all hunky dory out there with a less live ball. Yes, it can hurt plenty. That's a big part of why soaking the runner was ultimately abandoned. I just don't think you can really praise past players for their fielding skill when the rules were quite different. At least not praise them by today's standards for good fielding.

EDIT TO ADD: In reflection of AstrosFans post, I realize that the pictures only date back to the 1880s, after the rules had changed. That I will concede did take skill, or at least pretty tough hands. Granted the ball had gotten smaller compared to the 1860s ball and was more lively, it is still not the same as the ball that appeared in 1920. Of course I know some of the early greats could really hammer the ball. I have no desire to stand in front of a Sam Thompson line drive. But the difference in ball should be taken into account when discussing the relationship between fielding and gloves.

[AstrosFan]

I appoligize if I offended you. I didn't mean to come off sounding arrogant. Just wanting to be helpful.

My response was intended to be good-natured. Just givin' ya a hard time. I guess I should have put a smiley next to my post. Sorry about the confusion :)

[SHOELESSJOE3]

I appoligize if I offended you. I didn't mean to come off sounding arrogant. Just wanting to be helpful.



The book "But Didn't We Have Fun?" by Peter Morris mentions this several times, but I'm not goign to take the time to thumb through it to find pages. For the sake of speeding up the process I will cite the Vintage Base Ball Association. http://wiki.vbba.org/index.php/Education/RulesAndCustoms

1845 Knickerbocker Rules
Sec. 12
"If a ball be struck, or tipped, and caught, either flying or on the first bound, it is a hand out."

1854 Knickerbocker Rules
Sec. 6
"A ball being struck or tipped and caught, either flying or on the first bound, is a hand out."

1857 National Association of (Amateur) Base Ball Players Rules
Sec. 10
"If three balls are struck at and missed, and the last one is not caught, either flying or upon the first bound, it shall be considered fair, and the striker must attempt to make his run."
Sec. 11
"The striker is out if a foul ball is caught, either before touching the ground or upon the first bound."
Sec. 12
"Or, if three balls are struck at and missed; and the last is caught either before touching the ground or upon the first bound."
Sec.13
"Or, if a fair ball is struck, and the ball is caught either without having touched the ground or upon the first bound."

1858 National Association of (Amateur) Base Ball Players Rules
Sec. 10-13 match above

1860 National Association of (Amateur) Base Ball Players Rules
Sec. 10-13 match above

1860 Beadles Dime Ball Player Rules
Sec. 6
"A ball being struck or tipped, and caught either flying or on the first bound, is a hand out."

1861 National Association of (Amateur) Base Ball Players Rules
Sec. 10-13 match above

1862 National Association of (Amateur) Base Ball Players Rules
Sec. 10-13 match above

1864 National Association of (Amateur) Base Ball Players Rules
Sec. 11-14 correspond to Sec. 10-13 of above rule sets

The change is not made until 1865 when the phrase "upon the first bound" is removed from Section 14 (fair balls) of the 1864 rules. However the phrase is kept for catching foul balls. The 1866, 1867, 1868, 1869 rules on the matter all match the 1865 rules (fair balls must be caught on the fly, foul balls may be caught on the first bound).

In fact the first bound phrase does not totally go away until the 1884 National League of Professional Base Ball Players Rules in which the phrase is not issued for foul balls.

But the VBBA is not my only source. I have read this several places elsewhere. Sure it was only during a brief stint of the early years, but so was soaking the runner which is still very remembered.

Now of course this isn't all to say that it is all hunky dory out there with a less live ball. Yes, it can hurt plenty. That's a big part of why soaking the runner was ultimately abandoned. I just don't think you can really praise past players for their fielding skill when the rules were quite different. At least not praise them by today's standards for good fielding.
EDIT TO ADD: In reflection of AstrosFans post, I realize that the pictures only date back to the 1880s, after the rules had changed. That I will concede did take skill, or at least pretty tough hands. Granted the ball had gotten smaller compared to the 1860s ball and was more lively, it is still not the same as the ball that appeared in 1920. Of course I know some of the early greats could really hammer the ball. I have no desire to stand in front of a Sam Thompson line drive. But the difference in ball should be taken into account when discussing the relationship between fielding and gloves.

OK you cleared up the one bounce and out.
Not sure what you mean by praising past players for their fielding skills when the rules were quite different.

I don't think I praised them, only stated that it was no picnic for those in the field, at one time no glove and then to not much more than some padding on the palm and then later the fingers, resembling a dress glove more so than a fielder's mitt.

As far as comparing what they did in their day they could be considered the equal of any who followed them. No glove to any kind of glove is a a whole different world.

As for you bringing up the 1920's ball, it was not much different than the ball from 1911 on. That was the first year of the cork center ball . There has been much dispute over the ball change in 1919 or 1920, many historians believe it was the same as the ball from 1911 on. It was the banning of trick deliveries and replacing scuffed up balls that played the big part in the offensive explosion in the 1920s.

You keep referring to the "live" ball as though the ball of the 1800s was much easier to catch......with no glove. We have to get off the "live" ball talk, balls were hard right from the beginning.

We're talking hardball here and no gloves at one time, the fielders in those years had tougher than any did in later years. Your yielding some but grudgingly, downplaying the difficulty fielders played under in early years.

Who had it tougher on the field, the fielders in early years with no glove or later years when gloves were used, this one is easy.