Talk:1910 Chalmers Award

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Baseball Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BaseballWikipedia:WikiProject BaseballTemplate:WikiProject BaseballBaseball articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is one of the worst written articles I have come across. It is incomplete, when describing the controversy and unclear, though that likely is due to bad writing. Montju (talk) 18:08, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

--Akrasia25 (talk) 21:31, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not necessarily. Knowing how the Browns had conspired to give Lajoie the title, it's possible Ban Johnson had it counted twice on purpose in order to nullify Lajoie's tainted would-be title. Can I prove that? No. Nor can researchers prove it was "mistakenly" counted twice. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 11:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The picture posted with this entry is the most hilarious thing I've ever seen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.252.117.127 (talk) 19:47, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it is, then you need to get out more. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:50, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it's very funny. 129.116.71.114 (talk) 19:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You mean the part where Lajoie is saying, "My average is bigger than your average"? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 19:34, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please reference the Total Baseball Encyclopedia for a different (and more logical) rendition of the 1910 debacle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.249.197.250 (talk) 12:55, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]