1854.16: Difference between revisions

From Protoball
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Add Year Number)
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Chronology Entry
{{Chronology Entry
|Headline=The Eagle Club&#39;s Field Diagram - A <u>Real</u> Diamond
|Headline=The Eagle Club's Field Diagram - A <u>Real</u> Diamond
|Year=1854
|Year=1854
|Salience=2
|Salience=2
|Text=<p>John Thorn [email of September 2, 2009) has supplied an image of the printed "Plan of the Eagle Ball Club Bases" from its 1854 rulebook.</p>
|Text=<p>John Thorn [email of September 2, 2009) has supplied an image of the printed "Plan of the Eagle Ball Club Bases" from its 1854 rulebook.</p>
<p>It seems possible that he who designed this graphic did not intend it to be taken literally, but it sure is <i>different</i>.  Folks around here would call it a squashed rhombus.  Using the diagram's own scale for 42 paces, and accepting the guess that most people informally considered a pace to measure 3 feet, the four basepaths each measure 132 feet. But the distance from home to 2B is just 79 feet, and from 1B to 3B it's 226 feet [for football fans: that's about 75 yards].  Foul ground ["Outside Range" on the diagram] leaves a fair territory that is not in a 90 degree angle, but at . . . wait a sec, I'll find a professor and borrow a protractor, ah, here . . . a 143 degree angle.  <b>Query:</b> do we have evidence that the Eagle preferred, at least initially, a variant playing field? Or did they just assign this diagram to some Harvard person?</p>
<p>It seems possible that he who designed this graphic did not intend it to be taken literally, but it sure is <i>different</i>.  Folks around MIT here would call it a squashed rhombus.  Using the diagram's own scale for 42 paces, and accepting the questionable guess that most people informally considered a pace to measure 3 feet, the four basepaths each measure 132 feet. But the distance from home to 2B is just 79 feet, and from 1B to 3B it's 226 feet [for football fans: that's about 75 yards].  Foul ground ["Outside Range" on the diagram] leaves a fair territory that is not in a 90 degree angle, but at . . . wait a sec, I'll find a professor and borrow a protractor, ah, here . . . a 143 degree angle.  <b>Query:</b> do we have evidence that the Eagle preferred, at least initially, a variant playing field? Or did the Eagle Club  just assign this diagram to some Harvard person?</p>
|Reviewed=Yes
|Reviewed=Yes
|Year Number=16
|Year Number=16
}}
}}

Revision as of 07:18, 19 February 2013

Chronologies
Scroll.png

Prominent Milestones

Misc BB Firsts
Add a Misc BB First

About the Chronology
Tom Altherr Dedication

Add a Chronology Entry
Open Queries
Open Numbers
Most Aged

The Eagle Club's Field Diagram - A Real Diamond

Salience Noteworthy
Text

John Thorn [email of September 2, 2009) has supplied an image of the printed "Plan of the Eagle Ball Club Bases" from its 1854 rulebook.

It seems possible that he who designed this graphic did not intend it to be taken literally, but it sure is different. Folks around MIT here would call it a squashed rhombus. Using the diagram's own scale for 42 paces, and accepting the questionable guess that most people informally considered a pace to measure 3 feet, the four basepaths each measure 132 feet. But the distance from home to 2B is just 79 feet, and from 1B to 3B it's 226 feet [for football fans: that's about 75 yards]. Foul ground ["Outside Range" on the diagram] leaves a fair territory that is not in a 90 degree angle, but at . . . wait a sec, I'll find a professor and borrow a protractor, ah, here . . . a 143 degree angle. Query: do we have evidence that the Eagle preferred, at least initially, a variant playing field? Or did the Eagle Club just assign this diagram to some Harvard person?

Comment Edit with form to add a comment
Query Edit with form to add a query



Comments

<comments voting="Plus" />