TRIVIA....When Aaron Judge hits his 61 HR's, 2 coincidences result . What are they ?

[tedzan]

I expected to arrive home from the Philly Show to see the right answer posted here.

Oh well, it's not "rocket science".....the answer I'm looking for is quite obvious.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Outfield tickets for remaining Yankees games get even more expensive?

[Smarti5051]

I have two thoughts: (1) neither Maris nor Judge project to be Hall of Famers; and (2) even after hitting their "record breaking" home runs, there is a huge cohort that do not recognize them as the record holder because in Maris' case, he didn't do it in 154 games and in Judge's case there are 4 steroid seasons where more than 62 were hit.

[bmattioli]

At both times a Maris was in attendance..??

[Tyruscobb]

Three days is long enough for guesses. Just reveal your answer.

[tedzan]

At the hour of 9 pm tonight....to honor Maris' uniform #, and Judge's uniform # (99)....I will give out the answer.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[tedzan]

The coincidence is simply that the 3 of them all played Rightfield for the Yankees.






----



TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by tedzan

I expected to arrive home from the Philly Show to see the right answer posted here.

Oh well, it's not "rocket science".....the answer I'm looking for is quite obvious.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

mr2686 already did give the right answer, in post #19, which you failed to acknowledge. And before you even try to go and say it doesn't count because he didn't also include Ruth, remember it was you who originally asked about the coincidences if/when Judge should hit his 61st home run. Since Ruth never hit 61, why would he be part of the answer? Your first part of the answer had nothing to do with Ruth. Yet you specifically said the second part of the answer is that "the three of them all played Rightfield for the Yankees". Hmmmmmmmm!

[oldjudge]

What coincidence results if he never hits it?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

What coincidence results if he never hits it?

All three still played RF for the Yankees?

[frankbmd]

Ted,

Your trivia contest is as flawed or more flawed than any of mine.

All three played right field so why not include all the other Yankee right fielders since the 61st home run had nothing to do with it.

Now if he hits 62 this year, that's a whole different story and inconsequential I might add.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I think all Ted is saying is that all the figures in this drama -- Ruth, then Maris, and now Judge -- played RF for the Yankees. You guys are being kinda harsh.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I think all Ted is saying is that all the figures in this drama -- Ruth, then Maris, and now Judge -- played RF for the Yankees. You guys are being kinda harsh.

Bullsh@t! Quit trying to defend him.

He asked what two coincidences occur if/when Judge hits home run #61. The 61 years between Maris and Judge doing it is very clear, but only includes the two of them. But for the second part, Ruth didn't hit 61 home runs, yet the OP specifically asked for coincidences involving when Judge hits home run #61, not home run #60 or #62. The LEAST the OP could have done is acknowledge that mr2686 had the correct answer, or that maybe he just missed seeing his earlier post.

And trying to claim that including a card of Ruth's in the OP somehow made it okay, and that everyone should have known that meant Ruth was to suddenly be included in the second coincidence, makes absolutely no sense. Go back and look at all the guesses for that second coincidence, I believe pretty much all of them only involved Judge and Maris, so I was not alone in my interpretation of what was being asked.

And no one was being harsh, unless being factual and truthful is now that. The only person possibly being treated disrespectfully was mr2686, who appears to have correctly answered the question, but was afforded no credit for doing so, or at least an explanation as to why he was supposedly not right.

[abothebear]

The both have 9s in their uniform numbers.

[Peter_Spaeth]

As we have learned from Trivia with Frank Burkett, he who asks the question controls the answer. Plus Ruth's card was in the OP.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As we have learned from Trivia with Frank Burkett, he who asks the question controls the answer.

Plus Ruth's card was in the OP.

Thank you, Peter.

I had no intentions of responding to the "comments" in Post #28.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Thank you, Peter.

I had no intentions of responding to the "comments" in Post #28.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Ha, exactly what I would have expected, including a lack of acknowledgement that someone did answer your question.

[chriskim]

They are all baseball players?

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As we have learned from Trivia with Frank Burkett, he who asks the question controls the answer. Plus Ruth's card was in the OP.

Gee counselor, trying to pull someone else in to change the narrative and possibly give some out for the OP? Frank is a great guy, and so is the OP as a matter of fact. And Frank is also well known for making a lot of goofy and funny posts, that I for one enjoy reading. Now is the OP known for making similar funny and joking posts and doing other oddball and off-the-wall stuff occasionally, or more for being the serious and well-informed long-time collector and resident T206 expert, who pretty much always comes across as factual, knowledgeable, and correct, and is really never wrong?

The OP doesn't normally, to my knowledge at least, ever really act much like Frank in the way and manner he posts and discusses things. So why do you then suddenly invoke how someone else acts and interacts on the forum as a possible reason to defend or explain away what someone else does or doesn't do on the forum? Relevance counselor, relevance. What does how Frank posts and interacts with others here have to do with how the OP does, or otherwise explain his actions?

Quite frankly (pun fully intended), had it been Frank who had posed the original question the OP did, I wouldn't have posted anything. Knowing Frank, he probably would have made some hilarious comment regarding mr2686's response to begin with, or joked about his own mistake in how he posed the question.

And I already responded and dismissed your comment about the Ruth card image in this thread in a previous post.

[RCMcKenzie]

All 3 played right field. That was the answer to the question. The OP was looking for the best answer, which was not provided.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

All 3 played right field. That was the answer to the question. The OP was looking for the best answer, which was not provided.

Go back and read the question again. I've already spelled out how the way it was asked and posed doesn't include Ruth. If it was intended to include Ruth, then the first part answer is wrong then. Otherwise, explain to me then what Ruth has to do with the coincidence of Maris and Judge having hit 61 home runs, 61 years apart. Because from where I'm sitting it has absolutely nothing to do with Ruth.

[RCMcKenzie]

Originally Posted by BobC

Go back and read the question again. I've already spelled out how the way it was asked and posed doesn't include Ruth. If it was intended to include Ruth, then the first part answer is wrong then. Otherwise, explain to me then what Ruth has to do with the coincidence of Maris and Judge having hit 61 home runs, 61 years apart. Because from where I'm sitting it has absolutely nothing to do with Ruth.

Bob, I have to admit, I don't always read all of your posts, not because they are long, but because they are not double-spaced, and I'm in my mid 50's, and can't see as well as I used to. You and Ted are good posters in my book. I try not to get sideways with other folks on here, but I do anyway.

I guess my concern is...who are all these new advertisers that Leon has?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by BobC

Go back and read the question again. I've already spelled out how the way it was asked and posed doesn't include Ruth. If it was intended to include Ruth, then the first part answer is wrong then. Otherwise, explain to me then what Ruth has to do with the coincidence of Maris and Judge having hit 61 home runs, 61 years apart. Because from where I'm sitting it has absolutely nothing to do with Ruth.

Or you could be gracious and just let it go...

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by BobC

Gee counselor, trying to pull someone else in to change the narrative and possibly give some out for the OP? Frank is a great guy, and so is the OP as a matter of fact. And Frank is also well known for making a lot of goofy and funny posts, that I for one enjoy reading. Now is the OP known for making similar funny and joking posts and doing other oddball and off-the-wall stuff occasionally, or more for being the serious and well-informed long-time collector and resident T206 expert, who pretty much always comes across as factual, knowledgeable, and correct, and is really never wrong?

The OP doesn't normally, to my knowledge at least, ever really act much like Frank in the way and manner he posts and discusses things. So why do you then suddenly invoke how someone else acts and interacts on the forum as a possible reason to defend or explain away what someone else does or doesn't do on the forum? Relevance counselor, relevance. What does how Frank posts and interacts with others here have to do with how the OP does, or otherwise explain his actions?

Quite frankly (pun fully intended), had it been Frank who had posed the original question the OP did, I wouldn't have posted anything. Knowing Frank, he probably would have made some hilarious comment regarding mr2686's response to begin with, or joked about his own mistake in how he posed the question.

And I already responded and dismissed your comment about the Ruth card image in this thread in a previous post.

OMG!!!

Now it looks like I need a lawyer (anyone but Spaeth)

Ted and i are "buds". I would never pull his leg, because I cannot bend over far enough.