56*

Was Joe DiMaggio’s fifty-six-game hitting streak the greatest feat in all of sports or merely a product of its time?
Online Only: Facts and figures about Joe DiMaggio’s career can be found in “The DiMaggio Index.”Alfred Hitchcock once quipped that drama is life with the dull bits cut out. Baseball is like that, too, both as a sport and as a nine-inning contest — theatre that is frequently less than spellbinding. Quantum flashes of inspiration occur rarely, amid long stretches of tedium, and so, once observed, rapidly become mythical. For those who love the game, who learn and memorize its historical minutiae like verses of sacred text, the spells of inaction merely underscore whatever instances of transcendence we’re fortunate enough to witness. The deliberation of the game in these moments allows us, even encourages us, to hold past achievements in such high esteem.

During one eventful August weekend of this past season, three such moments flashed around North America in high definition, across fifty-inch plasma screens and onto the parchments of baseball history. Alex Rodriguez’s 500th home run and Tom Glavine’s 300th win (traditional Hall of Fame standards) bookended surely the most contentious record of them all: Barry Bonds’s 755th round-tripper, which tied the lifetime mark set by Henry Aaron thirty-one years ago. When, days later, the famously surly Bonds broke the record in front of a rapt home audience in San Francisco, headlines across North America invoked the asterisk some once used to qualify Roger Maris’s single-season home run record (achieved during a longer season than Babe Ruth’s mark). The asterisk for number 756 punctuated several years of debate over whether or not Bonds, whose steroid use was documented in a book by two San Francisco Chronicle reporters and whose personal trainer was imprisoned for steroid distribution, was worthy of the title of all-time home run king.

We in this hypermedia age have grown to expect this kind of microscopic scrutiny where our sporting heroes are concerned. But such was not always the case. And though it is worthwhile — and, for fans, fun — to consider every nuance of the astronomically remunerated performances of today, so too does it behoove those of us who love the game to train our lens backward, into baseball’s past. Many records of yesteryear, held to even a sliver of the light we cast upon the modern game, lose their sheen. Consider, for example, perhaps the most venerated record in all of sports, the fifty-six-game hitting streak of Joe DiMaggio.

Joseph Paul DiMaggio grew up in northern California, learning the subtleties of America’s pastime alongside his siblings on sun-baked lots in and around San Francisco. Three of Italian immigrant Giuseppe DiMaggio’s nine children went on to play major league baseball: Vince, Joe, and Dominic. And though Vince led the march to the professional game, playing with the San Francisco Seals of the Pacific Coast League in 1932, it was younger brother Joe who was the true prodigy. Having started with the Seals at seventeen, Joe ascended to the major leagues at only twenty-one.

When DiMaggio broke in with the Yankees in 1936, expectations were high. One writer observed, “Here is the replacement for Babe Ruth.” DiMaggio didn’t disappoint. His team won five of the next six World Series, and over the course of his career the “Yankee Clipper” established himself as one of the best players in the game. In 1955, he was elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame. But for all his accolades, he is known — most famously and above all else — for his hitting streak in 1941.

When the streak began on May 15 of that year, the Yankees had lost four games in a row and seven of the last nine, leaving them five and a half games out of first place. It was time for their better players to respond, and so DiMaggio did. For two full months, he reached base safely in every game, hitting .408 for the stretch, with fifteen home runs and the ludicrously low strikeout total of five. Hoisting themselves onto DiMaggio’s sinewy back, the Yankees vaulted into first place, going 41-13 (games nine and fourteen ended in ties) and eventually ran away with the American League pennant.

The streak came to an end on July 17, game two of a series against the hometown Cleveland Indians. It was a muggy Ohio night, yet there were more than 67,000 fans in attendance. DiMaggio had already obliterated the arcane record of Wee Willie Keeler, a 5’4”, 140-pound batsman who in 1897 had “Baltimore chopped” his way to a forty-four-game streak, assisted by the archaic rule that foul balls were not counted as strikes. Coming into the eighth, DiMaggio was 0-for-2 with a walk. He had twice smashed grounders that Indians third-baseman Ken Keltner had turned into unlikely outs. Relief pitcher Jim Bagby faced DiMaggio with the bases loaded and one down. Cleveland, which would end the season twenty-six games behind the eventual world-champion Yankees, was losing 4-1. There was, in essence, nothing at stake but the streak. When Bagby induced a grounder toward his adroit young shortstop, Lou Boudreau, the most extraordinary of sporting feats came to a most unremarkable end: a double play. The streak was over — consigned to the record books, to baseball history, to sporting mythology.

There were, from the earliest days, whispers that the streak was not all that it seemed. Given how thoroughly DiMaggio had trashed the old mark, and given that contemporaries such as Ted Williams and Stan Musial — hitters with stronger track records — could never break even the thirty-game mark, skeptics wondered if favouritism had somehow factored in. Indeed, a thoughtful examination suggests not only that the streak as we know it might not have happened, but also how and why such a fiction could persevere.

While DiMaggio was grinding through the early games of the streak, America was on the precipice of a conflict involving tens of millions of combatants. Congress had passed the Selective Service and Training Act the previous autumn, and by the summer of 1941 a handful of major-league stars, including Hank Greenberg, had been drafted in anticipation of the United States’s eventual entry into the war. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a life-long baseball fan, had written a letter in January of that year to baseball commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis stating, “I honestly feel that it would be best for the country to keep baseball going . . . if 300 teams use 5,000 or 6,000 players, these players are a definite recreational asset to at least 20,000,000 of [their] fellow citizens.” The summer of ‘41, at least as far as big-league baseball was concerned, was to be business as usual.

The distractions of the war combined with the limitations of the media of the times to keep the particulars of the streak from public scrutiny. Though baseball was first broadcast on television in 1939 (a game between Princeton and Columbia), it wasn’t until after the war that telecasts became common. Radio had been integral to the national pastime since the thirties, and by the time war broke out many teams broadcast their entire schedules, but the Yankees were unable to attract a corporate sponsor willing to pay $75,000 to broadcast home games during the summer of ‘41. So, short of attending games themselves, fans of the Bronx Bombers could follow the streak only by reading the papers or listening to a nightly fifteen-minute radio re-enactment on wins. Every DiMaggio at-bat not witnessed in person was thus filtered, condensed, and dramatized — fully left to the imagination.

HomePage 1 of 3Next
5 comment(s)

Lisa DavisSeptember 22, 2007 21:23 EST

Sirs:

That Dan Daniel had what we'd recognize today as a serious conflict of interest is an understatement. Yet your attempt to delegitimize the record overlooked several key points:

1) Law-and-Order Commissioner Landis not only had no problem with Daniel acting as the Yankees official home scorer, he allowed other teams to use writers with the exact same conflict of interest to act as their official home scorers.

2) Neither Appling or the White Sox raised hell with Landis re Daniel's scoring.

3) None of the hitters DiMaggio passed questioned the validity of the streak.

4) DiMaggio had a 61 game hitting streak in 1933 (no, none of them were scored by Daniel).

Why didn't you just conjure up some massive conspiracy in which Appling and every other fielder (and scorer) were paid off by the Yankees to suffer convenient lapses of "incompetence" because "America badly needed heroes" or some such nonsense? Better yet, stick to hockey!

The AuthorOctober 01, 2007 02:36 EST

Actually, if you read about DiMaggio's minor league streak (it's not the longest in minor league history, BTW) you would find that there were games when the scorer had to be escorted out of the park by policeman. Why? Because people were incensed with the hits DiMaggio was credited with. They considered it a sham: a media stunt. Cut to the Yankees in 1941. How and why would somebody cook up a hitting streak mythology? Perhaps because another team in another league had already used Dimaggio for that same purpose.

As for your Appling point; why on earth would he question the scoring? Perhaps you never played, but I can tell you that though you're never happy to fumble a play, if it's credited as a hit (rather than an error) you feel a lot better. It's simply counter-intuitive and illogical for the fielder in question to do anything but to sell the fact that it was a bad bounce. Again, that illustrates a key component that allows for the myth - Applings ever-lasting loyalty to the story... "wasn't my fault..."

Joe DiMaggio was an elite hitter - that's one of the key factors to consider in the creation of the streak. An average, or merely all-star hitter would be hard-pressed (Daniel or not) to duplicate this level of consistency. Many players have hit for higher averages over longer periods of time. Ichiro, for instance, once had a 10 week period of time when he hit .450. But there are few hitters capable of that at any one time.

If, against all common sense people decide to buy the myth, so what? Well, it seems to me that if it's important enough for someone to have an opionion about these things, they really should know more than the Sports Illustrated version of what happened.

Bob SOctober 08, 2007 17:52 EST

David Robbeson had it right about Dan Daniel's influences in baseball. Last game of 1945 season at Yankee Stadium, NYY Snuffy Stirnweiss
was battling CWS Tony Cuccinello for bat title.
In first at bat, Stirnweiss hit ordinary roller to Red Sox 3B Jack tobin who messed up the grounder completely. I was sitting at 3B railing of stands. The error sign went up. After the game ended, when it was learned that Cuccinello had won, .30846 to Stirnweiss' .30696, the scorer changed Tobin's error to a hit and Stirnweiss won bat title at .30854. This can be checked by game reports in NY Times & other NY papers.
Daniel controlled baseball writers so much that in 1942 he had NYY Joe Gordon win AL MVP with Gordon leading the AL 2B in errors and leading AL in grounding into DPs over Ted Williams' first triple crown.

Jerry HJuly 13, 2011 14:40 EST

I didn't really question DiMaggio's streak until I read "56 - Joe DiMaggio and the Last Magic Number in Sports," by Kostya Kennedy. Mr. Kennedy, an excellent writer, is a New Yorker through and through (a former reporter for Newsday and contributor to the NY Times and the New Yorker) and clearly a big fan of Joe DiMaggio who very strongly attacks any suggestion that DiMaggio's streak was not legitimate. However, in reading his very enjoyable book, I couldn't help but come to the opposite conclusion.

As Mr. Kennedy points out, Americans were exceedingly apprehensive about WWII (Pearl Harbor was only a few months away) and they were looking for a hero and something for which they could cheer. Baseball players were being drafted and called up on a regular basis. Meanwhile, the Depression was still being felt and ballparks around the league still experienced absolutely dismal crowds. In this climate, it's natural the baseball establishment would want to support something amazing - something like DiMaggio's streak.

Meanwhile, as this article points out, Dan Daniels had GREAT incentives to give DiMaggio hits rather than rule certain plays as errors. In fact, as Mr. Kennedy's book points out, Mr. Daniels absolutely cherished his role as the Yankees scorekeeper. Mr. Kennedy infers from this that Mr. Daniels would not skew his rulings in favor of DiMaggio, but considering that the Yankees owner probably would have dismissed Daniels had his ruling broken DiMaggio's streak, this is all the MORE reason for him to essentially cheat in DiMaggio's favor. (In his book, Mr. Kennedy addresses the Game 30 error and points out that "the media accounts" of the play all stess how it was a bad hop. Unfortunately, Mr. Kennedy only looked in New York media accounts and did not even reference what the Chicago media said about the play.)

Additionally, Mr. Kennedy's book also reflects how pitchers around the league often insisted upon pitching to DiMaggio in order to give him a "chance" to keep his streak alive, even when that was against his team's best interests. In one instance, the Yankees had a runner on first with one out in their last at bat and the hitter batting before DiMaggio, a power hitter, bunted in order to avoid hitting into a double play and depriving DiMaggio of getting another at bat. Then, with first base now open and two outs, the opposing pitcher declined to walk the hot-hitting DiMaggio (a no-brainer play, as any little league player can attest), but instead pitched to him and, perhaps not surprisingly, DiMaggio got a hit.

All in all, aside from making me realize that DiMaggio was a horrendous jerk (i.e., how he cheated on his pregnant wife while on road trips, though Mr. Kennedy insists DiMaggio remained faithful in his own way because he still missed his wife after sending the various floozies home after having sex with them), Mr. Kennedy's book utterly convinced me that DiMaggio's streak was largely, though certainly not entirely, the product of public relations, favorable scorekeepers, and not-so-antagonistic opposition.

Ethan LAugust 15, 2011 21:29 EST

A little further research indicates that smack dab in the middle of the streak, on June 1, cross town rival New York Giant Mel Ott hit his 400th home run and his 1,500th RBI. One day later Lou Gehrig dies. The Yankees MUST have been looking for a hero. So the games in question, games 31 and 32, would have been a great opportunity for media hype and to boost public morale, or better yet, YANKEE morale. It was great timing. And the perfect player to pin it on since he had a 61 game streak in the PCL. I'm not trying to devalue Dimaggio's streak, only put it in perspective. If the errors were overlooked, I can see why.

Comment on this article
  
I agree to walrusmagazine.com’s comments policy.

Canada & its place in the world. Published by
the non-profit charitable Walrus Foundation
TwitterFacebookRSS
On newsstands now
New Issue on Sale
March 2012
Subscribe online for as little as $2.49 an issue. Visit The Walrus Store
to buy prints of our covers
The Walrus Laughs
Search the web, support the Walrus Foundation
COPA