Pete Rose: "I bet 'like $2,000' per game "

[madinmaryland]

Pete Rose said on The Dan Patrick Show on Tuesday that he bet around $2,000 per game on the Reds while he was managing them.

"It was like $2,000. That's it," Rose said in the interview. "And it didn't change -- because I know you're going to say, Well betting's all about pitching and stuff like that -- I didn't care who was pitching for me or who was pitching for the opposition. I just made it easy for the guys making the bets and just bet this much every game and that's the way we did it."

In his 2004 book, My Prison Without Bars, Rose had admitted to betting $1,000 per game as manager of the Reds, starting in 1987, and said he bet $2,000 on football games. The $2,000 figure for baseball bets was mentioned in 1989's Dowd Report, the findings of baseball's investigation into Rose's gambling, but Rose had never previously confirmed that amount.

Rose was banned from baseball for life by then-commissioner Bart Giamatti in September 1989 but denied those allegations until early 2004, when he came clean and admitted to betting on the Reds while he was their manager.

The banishment has kept baseball's all-time hits leader out of the Hall of Fame. Rose, who retired after the 1986 season, compiled 4,256 hits, made 17 All-Star teams at five different positions, won the 1963 NL Rookie of the Year award, the 1973 NL MVP award and helped three teams to World Series titles. He managed the Reds from 1984 until his banishment in 1989.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/baseball/mlb/05/28/rose.betamount/index.html

I think he should be banned from every participating actively in baseball forever, but should be allowed into the hall of fame for his performance as a player.

[northzax]

1. keeping him out of the Hall makes a joke of the place

since when is the Hall about morality? it's about baseball. And Charlie Hustle was one of the alltime greats.

[rinsd]

2. The baseball HOF does take into account off-field stuff.

Unlike the football HOF which is supposed to be strictly about on field performance.

[northzax]

3. theoretically

what's remaarkable is that one man can issue a decision and ban someone for life, with no appeal.

[cboy4]

11. Absolutely agree that he belongs in the Hall

:thumbsup:

[trotsky]

4. Please let me know if I understand the story here.

Because I've always been confused about the whole deal.

Rose bet ON HIS OWN TEAM, and he bet that they would WIN. Correct?

If that's so, why the fuck is this even an issue? If he's betting on his team to lose, then as a manager he's in a great position to help himself win that bet, and that's terrible and he should never even be mentioned in the same breath with the Baseball HoF. But if he's betting on them to win, what the hell is the problem? I'm not even that big of a baseball fan and I think this is nonsense.

[rinsd]

5. Because winning at all costs 1 night can cost you the next in a 162 game season.

By gambling on the games and being in a position to influence its results, he has soiled the integrity of games he managed.

It does not matter if he bet on them to win though throwing a game would be much much worse in many people's eyes.

Take into consideration that Rose has been less than forthcoming and I doubt every single bet was for his team.

I just don't believe a gambler would sit idly by to win a few games over .500.

[trotsky]

6. Thank you for that.

I had never heard the opposing viewpoint stated so clearly and logically. You have given me plenty to think about.

[GOPisEvil]

7. Also, don't you think his bookie knew who he was dealing with?

Pete didn't bet on EVERY Reds game. Only a select few. How fast do you think the bookie would advise his better clients of a game on which Pete didn't bet.

Finally, if Pete was involved in a close game on which he bet, he might use a particular player or relief pitcher, even if that player or pitcher was being overused. That could have led to an injury.

[Tektonik]

8. If Rose does not get into the hall before he dies, I'll stop watching baseball forever

[Awsi Dooger]

9. Makes sense

Baseball odds are unlike football or basketball. That's what makes a standard amount like $2000 believable. It's not exactly $2000 per game. It's betting to win $2000 if the team is a favorite or exactly $2000 if the team is an underdog.

I've been there, dealing with bookies in the old days before offshore betting boomed. My standard amount was generally between $200 to $800, depending on what type of year I was having. In gambling terms a hundred is a dollar. I'd say give me two dollars on the Reds, for example. If they were favored at -133 (bet 133 to win 100) which meant I was risking 266 to win 200. But since you didn't want to specify all of that nonsense every day, the call would go something like this: "What are the Reds today?" "Minus 33" "Okay, give me two dollars on the Reds, listed pitchers." That meant it was no action if the pitching matchup was changed.

In Rose's terms $2000 was 2 dimes. He'd tell the bookie he wanted two dimes on the Reds every time he bet. That's fairly common in baseball because it's a grind sport in terms of wagering. Nothing is a sure thing. Hell, a huge favorite is 1/2, which is the equivalent of a 4 point favorite in a football game. Varying your bet size dramatically in baseball is normally a sure way to eventually lose. Much more sensible and common to isolate games for higher stake in football and basketball.

If Rose bet against his own team, that bookie would almost guarantee to set off alarms. As GOPisEvil posted, the bookie knew who he was dealing with. He damn sure didn't want jeopardy of $2000+ knowing the wagerer had direct impact. A bookie really wouldn't care if Rose were betting on his own team. It's more a guess than anything else, via the nature of the sport in which .600 is impressive. Betting to lose would be dramatically more significant and the bookie likely would have wagered his own money, or adjusted the odds sharply to attract money on the Reds, so he needed that side in the game.

I've known guys who bet 50 times that amount per game. Sounds like Rose was screwing around, like betting random races at the track. If he actually were trying to profit via thrown games he would have covered his tracks and splintered the wagering from joint to joint, and at far higher sum than 2 dimes.

[nomorenomore08]

10. Isn't he also the all-time leader in at-bats and games played?

I agree with most of the above posters, his numbers should get him into the Hall regardless of his "extracurricular" behavior. I mean, Ty Cobb (#2 in hits all-time) had to have been one of the biggest assholes the sports world has ever seen, and he was a shoo-in - are you really gonna tell me that betting on games is worse than assaulting a spectator?

[greenbriar]

12. dang that is a lot of money

wow