Were his Reds a good bet?
Rose states he bet on his team "every night"
"Pete Rose revealed Wednesday that he bet on the Reds "every night" while he was manager of the team and that the Dowd Report was correct when it said he did so.
Appearing on the Dan Patrick Show on ESPN Radio, Pete Rose said he bet on the Reds to win every night while he was their manager because he believed in his team.
"I bet on my team every night. I didn't bet on my team four nights a week. I was wrong," Rose said.
Rose said that he believed in his team so much that he bet on them to win every night.
"I bet on my team to win every night because I love my team, I believe in my team," Rose said. "I did everything in my power every night to win that game."
============================
Being the stat geek I am, let's see if Pete was a wise man to bet on his team every night ...
Here is his managerial record .... Rose's run as the Reds ringleader
Year League Team Age G W L WP Finish
+----+-----------+--------+---+-----+----+----+------+------+
1984 NL West Cincnnti 43 41 19 22 .463 5 Player/Manager
1985 NL West Cincnnti 44 162 89 72 .553 2 Player/Manager
1986 NL West Cincnnti 45 162 86 76 .531 2 Player/Manager
1987 NL West Cincnnti 46 162 84 78 .519 2
1988 NL West Cincnnti 47 134 75 59 .560 2
1989 NL West Cincnnti 48 125 59 66 .472 5
+----+-----------+--------+---+-----+----+----+------+------+
TOTAL 786 412 373 .525
Assuming all his bets were against the "dime line"
(generally requiring a 51.2 win percentage), Pete would have
made a slight profit (1.3%) overall during his years as Reds' skipper.
If he was betting on a "20-cent line", which requires a 52.4 win
percentage to break even, then Pete was probably wasting his time.
"I bet on my team to win every night because I love my team...I did everything in my power every night to win that game."
As usual, Rose is utterly beside the point. He broke baseball's most fundamental rule. One can argue the merits of the rule by applying 2007 morality to 1991 - or 1919 - circumstances, but when he broke the cardinal tenet, defiantly and repeatedly, while others tried to help him, the explicit penalty was expulsion.
His records are extant (as they should be) and his contributions are documented and displayed appropriately at the HOF museum. Baseball owes Rose nothing.
Rose owes baseball everything. Just go away.
http://azdiamondhacks.mlblogs.com/
Report any abuse or spam
He would have made 15% on the stock market, and still been in baseball. What a waste.
Michael Norton - Some Ballyard
http://mlblog.someballyard.com
Report any abuse or spam
You're making some assumptions there. Maybe Pete laid down a lot more green when, say, Jackson or Browning started in 1988, and a lot less when he gave ancient Jerry Reuss seven starts in '86.
Pete's probably an addict and anything he says at this point whatsoever should probably be taken with a C-note's worth of salt. His on-field accomplishments as a player speak for themselves, irrespective of his gambling problem, but he will never be enshrined in the HOF. I doubt any owner outside of Cincy would touch him with a 100-foot fair pole.
Unfortunately he won't shut up, because he wants to keep his name in the public and push his memorabilia, therefore he seeks out as many radio spots as he can get, I'll bet.
(Since Cincy played in Riverfront when he managed, do you think he put down his bets in artificial green?)
Report any abuse or spam