The Baseball Video Games of 1994

I noticed since childhood, probably by three years after, that there were so many baseball video games made in 1994, along with the American League-licensed movies Little Big League, Angels in the Outfield, and -- as I didn't learn until much later -- Major League II.

As for the video games, here are the ones for the consoles and a quick write-up for my memories of each.

MLB & MLBPA LICENSE

World Series Baseball (Sega, Genesis) - Can't relate anything about this game at all because I didn't have a Genesis in my elementary school years.

MLB LICENSE, BUT NO MLBPA LICENSE

Ken Griffey Jr. Presents Major League Baseball (Nintendo, Super NES) - For a while, the only baseball game we owned. My perception of the leagues and my first exposure to the new logos came from here. Editing player names was definitely a plus.

ESPN Baseball Tonight (Sony Imagesoft, Super NES) - Only rented this one a time or two, learning the name "I'll Never Be Your Beast of" Berman.

MLBPA LICENSE, BUT NO MLB LICENSE

MLBPA Baseball (EA Sports, Super NES & Genesis) - I liked the music, the scoreboard, and that team select menu. Hearing the Chop for the Cleveland team was a memorable moment. This was a rental for us.

Tecmo Super Baseball (Tecmo, Super NES & Genesis) - Finally, a game that had the National stars in red and the American stars in blue (I liked red and the NL better). The music was cool to me, and I liked how they handled shorter seasons by staggering games. A rental.

Super Bases Loaded 3 (Jaleco, Super NES) - It had its own thing, but I guess I preferred SBL2 because of its presentation. A rental.

HardBall III (Accolade, Super NES) - By the time I rented this one, it was late enough for me to buy New York and make them Tampa Bay because Boggs was there.

RBI Baseball '94 (Tengen, Genesis) - Again, no Genesis.

NEITHER MLB NOR MLBPA LICENSE

Super Bases Loaded 2 (Jaleco, Super NES) - The numbers on the backs of jerseys, the unique camera, and the edit teams made this a frequent rental and eventually a title I owned.

Sports Illustrated Championship Football & Baseball (Malibu Games, Super NES) - Rented it one time. I remember one of the football players' names was C.Schultz and that the baseball players had no names. That's about it.

Relief Pitcher (Tengen, Super NES) - I don't even remember seeing it on video store shelves. A compilation video many years later is where I learned it existed.

Super Baseball 2020 (Electronic Arts, Genesis) - The SNES port from '93 was a 21st-century pickup for me. By then, the controller was out of whack.

TO CONCLUDE

The baseball video game market really picked up. Was some of it because both sides were expecting a strike? Was it part of the cause of the strike? Or were this wave of baseball video games and the real-life players' strike just coincidental?

Whatever the case, 1994 gave us all of these baseball video games and several more.

Celebrating 90 Years of Arcade Baseball

The All-American Automatic Base Ball game was first shown to the public in 1929. The machine gave the player a lever to control the bat, which may have been the predecessor of pinball's flipper. It kept track of balls, strikes, outs, and runners. It counted called strikes and foul strikes. It had the pitcher pitch both balls and strikes, and it positioned an umpire behind him to signal the call with his arms.

The names of some period players were used. Before the advent of the All-Star Game, these teams were made up of players from a mixture of the two leagues.

The mechanical baseball game was shown in a 1929 issue of Popular Mechanics and written about in a 1930 issue of the coin-op magazine Automatic Age. A new version for 1931 was advertised in Automatic Age.

George Miner filed his patent for the apparatus near the beginning of 1932, and it was granted near the end of 1936. Unfortunately, Miner had died in a plane crash a year before.

The game lived on and became Rock-ola's 1937 World Series. By then a few other bat games had been made, but this one is the father of all arcade baseball.

Flippers were introduced for pinball in 1947, an innovation that changed the coin-op game business for the better. In what might not be a coincidence, Williams made its first of many baseball machines that year, a line that ended with that Slug-Fest machine I enjoyed at an Outer Banks boardwalk in the '90s.

LINKS TO VIDEOS
A restored version of the 1929 game being shown off
A quick look at the 1937 arcade machine
Fifteen-minute video, the first six minutes being the 1937 game in action (the same channel also has part 2 of the technical descriptions and a 40-minute video on how it differs from an earlier model)

EDIT 10/21/19: Added two words that were missing. Also, removed one parenthetical aside.

MLB 150 Teams

The All-Star Game is coming up, and for years I was visualizing ways to celebrate the 50th anniversary of MLB's 100th Anniversary celebration, or the 25th of its 125th Anniversary celebration. I envisioned something for this year akin to the Franchise Fours and All-Century Team ceremonies. It doesn't look as if there'll even be an all-time team for this occasion, much less what I've come up with here.

Some of these decisions can invite passionate debate. They weren't easy. I'd better be good and ready to defend these.

TEAMS OF THE HALF CENTURIES

First Half Century (1869-1918)
P: Christy Mathewson
C: Roger Bresnahan
1B: Cap Anson
2B: Nap Lajoie
3B: Frank Baker
SS: Honus Wagner
LF: Jesse Burkett
CF: Ty Cobb
RF: Willie Keeler

Second Half Century (1919-1968)
P: Warren Spahn
C: Yogi Berra
1B: Lou Gehrig
2B: Jackie Robinson
3B: Eddie Mathews
SS: Ernie Banks
LF: Ted Williams
CF: Joe DiMaggio
RF: Babe Ruth

Third Half Century (1969-2018)
P: Greg Maddux
C: Johnny Bench
1B: Eddie Murray
2B: Joe Morgan
3B: Mike Schmidt
SS: Cal Ripken Jr.
LF: Barry Bonds
CF: Ken Griffey Jr.
RF: Reggie Jackson

Now, the decade teams. Players can appear on only one each. Some selections were made for the sake of having particular legends (Alexander over Herb Pennock, Ward over Jack Glasscock). When it comes to outfielders, I make distinctions between the three individual positions and select accordingly.

Feel free to see in your mind's eye how these teams would be shown with period presentation and music.

TEAMS OF THE DECADES

1870s: Al Spalding, Deacon White, Cap Anson, Ross Barnes, Levi Meyerle, George Wright, Jim O'Rourke, Paul Hines, Orator Shafer

1880s: Tim Keefe, Buck Ewing, Dan Brouthers, Bid McPhee, Ned Williamson, John Ward, Harry Stovey, Pete Browning, King Kelly

1890s: Cy Young, Deacon McGuire, Jake Beckley, Cupid Childs, John McGraw, Hughie Jennings, Ed Delahanty, Billy Hamilton, Willie Keeler

1900s: Christy Mathewson, Roger Bresnahan, Frank Chance, Nap Lajoie, Jimmy Collins, Honus Wagner, Fred Clarke, Ty Cobb, Sam Crawford

1910s: Walter Johnson, Ray Schalk, Jake Daubert, Eddie Collins, Home Run Baker, Buck Weaver, Sherry Magee, Tris Speaker, Joe Jackson

1920s: Pete Alexander, Mickey Cochrane, Jim Bottomley, Rogers Hornsby, Joe Dugan, Joe Sewell, Zack Wheat, Hack Wilson, Babe Ruth

1930s: Lefty Grove, Bill Dickey, Lou Gehrig, Charlie Gehringer, Pie Traynor, Arky Vaughan, Joe Medwick, Lloyd Waner, Mel Ott

1940s: Bob Feller, Walker Cooper, Johnny Mize, Bobby Doerr, Bob Elliott, Lou Boudreau, Ralph Kiner, Joe DiMaggio, Stan Musial

1950s: Warren Spahn, Yogi Berra, Gil Hodges, Jackie Robinson, Eddie Mathews, Ernie Banks, Ted Williams, Mickey Mantle, Hank Aaron

1960s: Sandy Koufax, Joe Torre, Harmon Killebrew, Pete Rose, Ron Santo, Maury Wills, Carl Yastrzemski, Willie Mays, Roberto Clemente

1970s: Tom Seaver, Johnny Bench, Willie Stargell, Joe Morgan, Mike Schmidt, Dave Concepcion, Lou Brock, Cesar Cedeno, Reggie Jackson

1980s: Fernando Valenzuela, Gary Carter, Eddie Murray, Ryne Sandberg, George Brett, Cal Ripken Jr., Rickey Henderson, Robin Yount, Dale Murphy

1990s: Greg Maddux, Mike Piazza, Frank Thomas, Craig Biggio, Matt Williams, Barry Larkin, Barry Bonds, Ken Griffey Jr., Juan Gonzalez

2000s: Randy Johnson, Joe Mauer, Albert Pujols, Chase Utley, Alex Rodriguez, Derek Jeter, Manny Ramirez, Jim Edmonds, Ichiro Suzuki

2010s: Clayton Kershaw, Buster Posey, Miguel Cabrera, Robinson Cano, Adrian Beltre, Troy Tulowitzki, Ryan Braun, Mike Trout, Ben Zobrist

INSPIRATION FOR THESE LISTS: Sports Illustrated's The Baseball Book all-time team and all-decade teams (2006); The Sporting News Selects Baseball's 100 Greatest Players decade teams (1998); Street & Smith's Baseball "Team of the Century" (1998); New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract decade teams and position rankings (2001); BWAA all-time teams of 1969 and 1997; Sports Illustrated's Baseball's Greatest (2013); ESPN Hall of 100 (2012); SABR top 100 (1999); Athlon Sports Baseball's "All-Century Team...So Far" (2019); and other sources

The Funny Farm

I started this blog in 2012 with a post inspired by the Reading Fightin Phils, and now I am moved to post again about minor league baseball branding.

It seems that in 2017, minor league teams are TRYING to strip themselves of any dignity while making money from merchandise. A few months ago, I learned the new name of the Binghamton Mets, one that is probably the most ridiculous in MiLB. They will be called the Rumble Ponies.

Let that sink in.

Rumble Ponies.

Rumble...

...Ponies.

I don't know if any young players in the organization would go out of their way to refer to their minor league teams by name, but now, if they make their way through Binghamton this year or somewhere down the line, they have absolutely zero reason to say anything other than "Binghamton in the Eastern League."

And the name has an esoteric explanation: Binghamton is apparently "Carousel Capital of the World," and the one who won the name-the-team contest drew from a Binghamton U employee's children's book and/or memories of imagining these were real horses and/or dreams of them being real horses. It supposedly represents local "men of industry" bringing to the area something "for the community to enjoy," as well as the "aggression and fighting spirit" necessary to break free from the constraints of a carousel.

But that doesn't justify such a ridiculous name!

To hear them talk about it, it was either that or moving.

I bring this up because today I learned of yet another silly name change coming this year with its own esoteric explanation.

The New Orleans Zephyrs, a current Marlins affiliate whose name dates back to its days in Denver -- Zephyr being a totally fine name that refers to the west wind -- will be known as the Baby Cakes.

Supposedly it refers to the plastic baby in a king cake, which is an annual New Orleans tradition for January 6, the Epiphany, the beginning of Carnival, a season ending with Mardi Gras. But again, let it sink in.

Baby Cakes.

Yeah. As with Binghamton, find whatever problem you will with it.

That name goes hand-in-hand with Rumble Ponies when it comes to keeping things fresh so you can move merchandise. At least Jacksonville Jumbo Shrimp, another new name for 2017, is one where you can get the gist immediately. The Wood Ducks of Kinston, N.C., have a reasonable name, but call them "Down East Wood Ducks" and some will think of Maine. Another new team, the Florida Fire Frogs of Kissimmee, Fla., sounds a bit too reminiscent of the NBA D-League's Florida Flame, but whatever.

These names won't be in Who's Who in Baseball or on the backs of Topps cards when these guys get to the majors, but they do matter.

First Time Watching League of Legends

Three hundred sixty-five days ago, I watched an archived stream of a League of Legends match for the first time. It was TSM against UOL at the Extreme Masters. I learned so much about the game since, though I don't know nearly enough. Here, uncut and uncensored, is a log of what I thought as I was watching, which will be funny to e-sports fans and maybe ring a bell or two with non-fans.

So, I'm watching as much as I can of a full LoL match. Just curious. How much would it make sense to someone who's not quite experienced at watching? What would be helpful in writing a guide to this? What kind of presentation effects would be used to clarify things? How much will the broadcasters assume we know? It's Team SoloMid vs. the Unicorns of Love. They assume we know what jungling is and maybe who the players are. Lions? Dragons? Lanes?
Eleven minutes in, we see text that's too small to see. So does every player pick three? I see that they pick in serpentine order.
Nineteen minutes. What's ganking? And they assume we know which champions they picked and whatnot? I'm looking stuff up now.
Resuming after looking a few things up. Level 1 and Level 2 are also things to look up as well. Krug? Gromp?
22 and a half minutes - So does a slain champion get replaced by one of the other champions, or are the three picks for different rounds?
What are the icons in the players' places? Are they levels? Yep. What's a leash?
Twenty-five minutes - Is it because of my 480i thing that I can't clearly see things like how much gold each team has? What's a pantheon? What's recalling?
It looks as if the summoner stays in the game while the champion is out of it. Or is First Blood just the first hit?
Twenty-nine minutes -
Thirty-one minutes - Lotta stuff I'm not understanding, and I haven't gone over gameplay enough.
Thirty-three minutes - Can players switch among champions in the middle of the action? Or is it one at a time?
Thirty-six minutes - What do the UOL gain by having slain the Dragon?
Thirty-eight minutes - Okay, players don't just stick to one champion for the whole game. This match is collecting as much gold as possible within a time limit.
Forty-two minutes -
Forty-five minutes - The commentators and pre-game analysts are probably of good service for those in the know.
Forty-eight minutes - Do dragons come up regularly? At 16, 24, and 30 minutes?
Fifty-two minutes - Is the Nexus even involved here? What's zero-five-zero?
Fifty-five minutes - And how does one get 17 kills when there are 15 champions?
Fifty-six minutes - And we're at the stage of destroying inhibitors...
Fifty-seven minutes - So what was the win condition? Time running out? A certain number of inhibitors being destroyed?
Fifty-eight minutes - It's the nexus.
Fifty-nine minutes - And it took 40 minutes to play, which seems to be a long time for one part of a best-of-three match, unless you're thinking of tennis. How long is the intermission between this game and the next? Do they pick and ban a new set of champions for the next one? And what's Jungle TF? Is that one of the summoners?
Post view: Pantheon is a champion, and others whose names I heard are LeBlanc, Twisted Fate, Rumble, and Lissandra.
This big defeat for SoloMid is apparently a big deal because a few years ago they won MLG gold medals.
There are said to be sixteen "free" champions, but there were seventeen made available Feb. 21, 2009.

I still haven't memorized a bunch of things, and I'm nowhere near an expert, but maybe I'll learn more. I now know what it is to which "jungle TF" refers, what 0-5-0 is, that summoners DO have one champion the whole game, that the two other icons are for summoner spells, and a few basic things about how a match works. I even have my own idea for a box score, and for player and champion trading cards.

 

Happy New Year. And I don't like the word "gank."

EDIT 1/14: Had to correct win-loss percentage on Tahm Kench card because I had neglected to do so. Also, sorry for the shoddy arrangement of the boxes. I do these on PowerPoint.

My Franchise Fours

The All-Star Game is tomorrow, and there will it be revealed what players won the fans' votes for the latest promotion. I voted once, sometimes using the rule of one player representing each of four periods in franchise history, and other times going with players common to pennant-winning teams. I later came up with some short series of words about them.

BALTIMORE ORIOLES
Cal Ripken Jr.: Famous across the country, an idol in the Mid-Atlantic.
Brooks Robinson: One of the best third basemen, and the cornerstone of the '60s-'70s team.
Frank Robinson: The last important piece for the '66 championship squad.
Jim Palmer: The Orioles' ace pitcher in its best days.

BOSTON RED SOX
Ted Williams: The Red Sox' best ever. A legend.
Cy Young: His pitching helped Boston win pennants in their earliest days.
Carl Yastrzemski: Ted's successor as the face of the franchise.
David Ortiz: Major contributor to the club's three world titles this century.

NEW YORK YANKEES
Babe Ruth: The franchise and the game matured with him at the forefront.
Derek Jeter: For the most recent dynasty, it's this guy.
Joe DiMaggio: Led the Yankees to more championship years; beloved across America.
Mickey Mantle: Ditto.

TAMPA BAY RAYS
Carl Crawford, Evan Longoria, David Price, and Ben Zobrist: For their numbers and for their participation on the pennant-winning team of 2008.

TORONTO BLUE JAYS
Roberto Alomar: The only one whose number the club's retired.
Roy Halladay: A player to watch when the Jays weren't a team to watch.
Carlos Delgado: One of the team's biggest names in the '90s for several years.
Joe Carter: Four words. World Series home run.

CHICAGO WHITE SOX
Frank Thomas: The star of the ballclub while it redefined itself again.
Eddie Collins: The best of the Sox that won the '17 and '19 flags.
Nellie Fox: Of two middle infielders who sparked the team in and around '59, he did a bit more than Luis.
Luke Appling: Represents the franchise in his time.

CLEVELAND INDIANS
Nap Lajoie: So much of the Cleveland club's early history comes from him.
Tris Speaker: Among the best of his time, he helped them get their world championship in 1920.
Bob Feller: Think of the Tribe in their best days and he comes up.
Lou Boudreau: Manager and shortstop for that '48 team.

DETROIT TIGERS
Ty Cobb: An all-time great who helped define the Tigers early.
Al Kaline: Star of the club for a good portion of the postwar period.
Hank Greenberg: Seeing that he had a 58-homer season gives something of a glance at the team of his day.
Miguel Cabrera: The biggest contributor to Detroit as they excelled in the 2010s.

KANSAS CITY ROYALS
George Brett, Brett Saberhagen, Willie Wilson, and Dan Quisenberry: Two pitchers and two batters who were big contributors on those '80s teams.

MINNESOTA TWINS
Walter Johnson: Said to be the best pitcher of all time. The team's Washington years cannot be denied.
Kirby Puckett: The face of the franchise in its Series-winning years.
Harmon Killebrew: Not just a 500 Club member; he's a 580 Club member.
Rod Carew: Along with Harmon, one of two players who got the team its '69 and '70 division titles.

HOUSTON ASTROS
Jeff Bagwell: Shone the brightest of the '90s Astros.
Craig Biggio: Also a major star in the team's prime years.
Nolan Ryan: Continued to be one of the league's best pitchers throughout the '80s.
Lance Berkman: Supplemented the other Killer B's and was more than present for the club's first pennant.

LOS ANGELES ANGELS OF ANAHEIM
Nolan Ryan: Had his best strikeout years in Anaheim.
Jim Fregosi: If not for his presence on the early Angels, then for the fact that he was the one traded for Nolan.
Mike Trout: Leading the way in an outstanding time for the club.
Tim Salmon: The franchise star in the '90s; helped them win the World Series in '02. A lifetime Angel.

OAKLAND ATHLETICS
Eddie Collins: The jewel in the crown of the "$100,000 Infield." Made it as a write-in.
Jimmie Foxx: The Elephants' answer to Babe Ruth during their three-year pennant run.
Reggie Jackson: Extremely high profile player during and after those '70s championships.
Rickey Henderson: The Man of Steal is a man of many teams, but Oakland was his home.

SEATTLE MARINERS
Ken Griffey Jr.: The symbol of '90s baseball. The all-time Mariners favorite.
Ichiro Suzuki: Other teams lost 116 games in 2001 getting used to his style and skills.
Felix Hernandez: Excellent among today's pitchers.
Randy Johnson: Helped make the AL fear having to face the M's, which was quite an accomplishment.

TEXAS RANGERS
Nolan Ryan: On the emerging Rangers of '89-'93, not just a figurehead.
Ivan Rodriguez: Stood out among the young players leading the '90s team; best AL catcher of the time.
Rafael Palmeiro: A strong player for the club in both his stints.
Josh Hamilton: Quite a notable player for the back-to-back pennant winners.

ATLANTA BRAVES
Hank Aaron: An idol for Braves fans and non-fans alike.
Chipper Jones: The standout position player for the club in the '90s.
Greg Maddux: Ace of that legendary staff, and maybe best MLB pitcher of the decade.
Warren Spahn: This super southpaw makes it so the '50s and '90s are equally represented.

MIAMI MARLINS
Gary Sheffield: Three-time All-Star in the six seasons when he spent some time with the Fish.
Mike Lowell: One of the best players for the '03 Series winners.
Jeff Conine: For a second '97 player, I picked this guy, a franchise man from the beginning.
Josh Beckett: His pitching was a key contribution on that '03 team.

NEW YORK METS
Tom Seaver: One of the forces driving the '69 miracle and a star pitcher beyond that.
Keith Hernandez: Not just a great fielder, his contact hitting and good eyes helped the '86 team go far.
Mike Piazza: Best NL catcher of the '90s; came up as a Dodger, but won a pennant as a Met.
David Wright: In a time that's anything but the club's salad days, he's remained the man to talk about.

PHILADELPHIA PHILLIES
Mike Schmidt: The best the Phillies ever had. Full stop.
Robin Roberts: When I think of the Whiz Kids, he might be the first or second one to come up.
Chase Utley: Outstanding second baseman in his prime, and just the man to represent the '08 champs.
Grover Cleveland Alexander: My write-in. Pete spent some great years with the Phils.

WASHINGTON NATIONALS
Rusty Staub: The star of the team as it was building its Montreal fan base.
Andre Dawson: One of two Hall of Famers for the club in its golden early '80s.
Gary Carter: The other.
Vladimir Guerrero: A bright spot for the Expos in a bleak period.

CHICAGO CUBS
Mordecai Brown: The ace for Chance's Cubs, four-time pennant winners.
Gabby Hartnett: Players came and went on the '20s and '30s Cubs, but he stayed.
Ernie Banks: No lights at Wrigley Field, entertaining but still losing; Ernie exemplifies those days.
Ryne Sandberg: Standout on a team that got to the playoffs twice in the '80s.

CINCINNATI REDS
Johnny Bench: A Red for life and a catcher among catchers.
Joe Morgan: Thrived on the turf at Riverfront Stadium. A patient hitter and a base stealer.
Pete Rose: Hard to find players like him.
Barry Larkin: Not exactly a new arrival when they won the '90 Series, he's associated with the '95 division champs.

MILWAUKEE BREWERS
Paul Molitor, Robin Yount, Rollie Fingers, and Cecil Cooper: The first three of these are easy choices, and I got my fourth from the '82 pennant winners as well.

PITTSBURGH PIRATES
Honus Wagner: To this day, shines among Pirates and shortstops.
Pie Traynor: Best thirdsacker of the first half century.
Roberto Clemente: Three thousand hits, two world titles, and a whole lot of legacy.
Willie Stargell: The charismatic captain of the club that earned the crown in '79.

ST. LOUIS CARDINALS
Rogers Hornsby: The cornerstone of the franchise and one of the true greats of the game.
Stan Musial: No question about him.
Ozzie Smith: Like my other three picks, the face of the club in one of its surges of excellence.
Albert Pujols: Cast a long shadow in St. Louis.

ARIZONA DIAMONDBACKS
Randy Johnson, Curt Schilling, Luis Gonzalez, and Reggie Sanders: Including my write-in, four guys who were key to the club's proudest achievement.

COLORADO ROCKIES
Larry Walker: When you think of the '95 Rockies, you think of him, and vice versa.
Todd Helton: A Rockie for most of the club's history, and a very good one.
Matt Holliday: Young player who helped the team soar to the pennant in '07.
Troy Tulowitzki: Ditto.

LOS ANGELES DODGERS
Jackie Robinson: His career represents a golden age for the Dodgers.
Sandy Koufax: The club's continued success was led by this fine pitcher.
Fernando Valenzuela: This phenom gave the team the push they needed in '81.
Clayton Kershaw: Too early to say if he's leading LA into a new age of success, but I went one per period.

SAN DIEGO PADRES
Tony Gwynn: His presence at the plate made the Padres something.
Dave Winfield: Before Tony arrived, the club was at least worth a look thanks to this guy.
Trevor Hoffman: He had the last word in ballgames, but he's not my last pick.
Steve Garvey: Carried his star power from LA, which might've helped them in '84 in a non-statistical way.

SAN FRANCISCO GIANTS
Christy Mathewson: Heroic figure who led the way for the Giants early in the last century.
Mel Ott: The Babe didn't have New York's only big bat anymore.
Willie Mays: You can't say "amazing" without saying his surname.
Barry Bonds: Excellent before 2001, a huge drawing card to the China Basin ballpark since.

NEGRO LEAGUE PLAYERS
Satchel Paige: A showman and a master hurler.
Josh Gibson: The star slugger wherever he played.
Oscar Charleston: Some say he could do it all.
Buck Leonard: The Gehrig to Gibson's Ruth.

EARLY PLAYERS
George Wright: A Red Stocking in Cincinnati and Boston.
Cap Anson: The most famous of all 19th-century players.
King Kelly: A big star in his day.
Willie Keeler: I picture him always bunting, but I'm sure he did more.

GREATEST LIVING PLAYERS
Aaron, Mays, Rickey, and Barry: Three of the top five home run hitters and the all-time stolen bases leader. The record holders can't be denied, and the image of Aaron and Mays in 1001 Reasons to Love Baseball set my image of the words "living legends." Maybe because those words were next to it.

After all that, you might notice a few things. Bias toward position players might be one of them. This is obviously subjective, and methods differ by team (not every team's the same). Most of these are still raw and off the cuff. I also wanted to put in "everyone else" sections to justify not picking the others on the ballot, but sometimes it's just difficult to explain, sometimes I don't remember my reasoning all that vividly, and sometimes I don't want to put anyone down (hence avoiding talk about unsavory details). Stating these concerns would show I'm self-aware, and it would be necessary in fully fleshing out the post.

EDIT 10/21/2019: With the look of this blog being overhauled, I might as well not have the players' names in red.

The Definition of Game Show

The following was originally typed December 30, 2012, and it was expanded upon January 7 and 16, 2013. It is posted here without being finished or anything like that.

Are Survivor and The Amazing Race to be counted on lists of “game shows?” They’re not quite presented with all the trappings of what most perceive as game shows, and they’re long-term, intense compe­titions. The term “reality show” can cover a broad range of program­ming, from competitions to documentaries, but many have some manipulation from the writers to make sure the people are acting to some extent.

If a game show is something with a pure competition among contestants that isn’t messed with in any way (except in what’s covered by “this program was edited for broadcast”), then should we strike such rigged ‘50s quiz shows as Twenty-One from the “game show” category and put them down as something akin to pro wrestling, but with moves that involve more words and fewer physical grapples?

What about Love Connection? Some call it a game show, but how do we know it is or isn’t? What about The Hollywood Squares and Match Game? How much of a game should it be to meet the requirements? How much skill should it take? What about What’s My Line? How much input from a contestant does there have to be? What about American Gladiators? How much of the presentation we associate with game shows do we need?

Forget for a moment everything you know about game shows, including the sense that you know one when you see one.

Now let’s look at Jeopardy! There’s obviously a game going on there, isn’t there? Three contestants are given a test of how much each one knows about various topics, with the ability to quickly think of the correct response to each clue playing its part in deciding which one gets the money. This is definitely a quiz show, and it’s a deep one, with the jeopardy of losing money by answering incorrectly, the strategy in figuring out what to wager on a Daily Double, and – especially now that only the winner gets all of the money – the strategy for Final Jeopardy! Anyone who says this isn’t a game show is crazy.

Here’s another quiz show, Twenty-One. Two players take turns selecting a point value for a category, each one not knowing what the other has done. Does a player end the game thinking the other player has fewer or keep it going the full length? Does the winner, if there is one, face another contestant and risk it all or walk away with the money earned? And if there’s a tie, the two play again, and the payoff to the winner increases. It sure sounds exciting. If the right kinds of people are playing, that is. And the production company made sure that was the case. It was planned out like a professional wrestling match of the mind, with “faces” like Charles Van Doren and “heels” like Herbert Stempel. But until word got out and Congress subsequently investigated the industry, people believed it and other quiz shows were real game shows as much as they thought pro wrestling was a real sporting competition.

Let’s switch gears and look at Family Feud. The core of the game is being able to guess what a bunch of people said to a certain survey. Members of each family go to the podium to see which family gets the choice to continue guessing or pass the question to the other one (though some formats made it so the family that won the faceoff just played the question). There’s no real quiz involved, so they’re free to get appealing families for the show. Occasion­ally, a contestant will give strange answers, showing the foibles some people may have. It’s good, casual fun, but each family really wants to score enough for the chance to play for the big money.

Of course, the version of the show that’s been in syndication since ’99 plays for points in the front game, not dollars. That’s because the game can be edited for broadcast; they have a certain amount of time in which to play that is restricted more. Early on, they had a fourth round worth triple the points, but soon they changed it so the first to 300 won. The latter change makes it more likely that the program be edited so one family doesn’t get to 300 in three rounds. The point of the editing is that the outcome of the game isn’t changed. That’s part of what makes the current Feud look fake, but at least they’re not planning every single move.

Now let’s look at the ‘70s version of Match Game. The focus here is obviously not as much on the game as it is on the celebrities. The contestants might want to have half a brain if they want a chance to play in the bonus round, but sometimes the funny stories have only one general way to fill in the blank. As was the case with other Goodson-Todman panel shows, much of the appeal lay with the emcee and panelists. This one also had as one of its chief points the kind of humor on which TV tried to keep the lid as tight as possible, the kind that would be present in a few sitcoms of the period. The bonus round was a basic enough task as well, but it fit in well with the light format.

There’s no denying that Family Feud and Match Game were game shows because each one involved competing civilian contestants, but What’s My Line is on the flip side. When pan­elists try to guess what the civilian does for a living, it’s a game for them, but the civilian and emcee try not to lead them in the wrong direction. That holds true for mystery challengers as well, even though the celebrity may answer in an altered voice or without words. Expansions and alterations of the format appeared on other shows, but this one is considered the epitome because of the prestige of the panel, the distinguished mystery guests, and the fact that it started in 1950.

One show along the lines of What’s My Line that adds a bit of a game-like element on the other side is To Tell the Truth. One story about a person is told, and along with that person are two imposters trying to deceive the panel, all of whom ask their choice of contestants for further details that may help in revealing which one is actually the person around whom the story revolves.

Speaking of having to choose among three, the The Dating Game, where the bachelor­ette is given some questions to ask of bachelors and chooses one after all that questioning, is certainly more of a game show than Love Connection. The latter is more about recounting the date itself, and picking one of the three happens before the show. But the studio audience, after seeing the same tapes the guest saw, votes for one of the three with whom the production com­pany can pay for another date. What makes it a game show in so many people’s minds, though, instead of another daytime TV show? Is it Chuck Woolery? Is it the presentation? Is it the real and/or per­ceived differences from shows where the idea is to bring on the most pathetic of people and for the studio and TV audience to mock them? While we’re at it, does America’s Funniest Home Videos qualify as a game show because of the prizes involved?

If competition is something that defines the boundaries of a game show, then where does that put quiz shows where only one person is competing, like Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? Those are game shows as well, because quiz shows are a subset of game shows, aren’t they? Although quiz shows with one contestant against the questions alone date back at least to the days of radio (including Take it or Leave It, whose TV successor was The $64,000 Question), we’ve cast doubt on classifying any big-money quiz shows from the ‘50s as game shows. In the minds of game-show fans, though, they count just the same.

Millionaire goes up a money ladder with questions getting more difficult as the money at stake grows, similar to The $64,000 Question, but a law passed 39 years before its US debut prohibits fixing. Come to think of it, the process of getting on the network version started with quizzes by phone and culmina­ted in a compe­tition among ten possible contestants at the studio, where the one who could place four items in the correct order the fastest qualified for the chance to win the big money, so there was some competition with others that was seen on TV. These days, the syndicated Millionaire has adjusted its format to some extent, but it hasn’t come anywhere near the excitement that spawned so many big-money game shows in the first few years of the 2000s.

Such giveaways happen on Survivor, but only some people think of it as a game show. A bunch of people spend an extended period of time competing on a show that has a finite amount of episodes shown on a weekly basis, and the winner gets a million dollars. Others don’t think of it as a game show, but a now-defunct game show Web site calls the slew of long-term competitions it spawned “game operas.” It might have a few elements in common with non-competitive reality shows that are more like documentaries (e.g. Pawn Stars), especially if it’s people who wouldn’t usually be together doing things they wouldn’t otherwise do (e.g. The Real World), but the fact that competition is the driving element makes Survivor a kind of game show to some, albeit an unconventional one, while purists put it in a different category.

Not every game show is played from a podium and/or sitting down. Beat the Clock challenges people to do physical stunts in a set amount of time. The Nickelodeon version of Double Dare (not to be confused with an unrelated Goodson-Todman show of the same name) has such stunts involved as an alternative to answering questions from a podium, and an ob­stacle course is the endgame. Truth or Consequences is even less about answering questions than Double Dare, and it was a pioneer of the format, having made its radio debut in 1940. Minute to Win It has all the big-money trappings Millionaire codified applied to challenges, but unlike Beat the Clock, contestants usually practice these challenges at home. All of these count as game shows for sure, with contestants who strike the audience as everyday people and a format that’s all in good fun, except in the case of the high-stakes Minute to Win It.

But for every hundred John and Jane Does running with shopping carts on Supermarket Sweep, there’s an excellent athlete who can hold his or her own with the physical specimens on American Gladiators. Other game shows have tournaments with varying degrees of regularity, but here, the larger competition was a tournament among only a few who had passed auditions, like most reality competitions today. Though it could be considered sports entertainment and/or a spiritual ancestor of the kind of competitions that emerged in the 2000s, game-show fans also count it as a game show. The contestants don’t sit down or stand at podiums while playing, the hosts are more like sports announcers than game-show emcees, and the prize money isn’t emphasized if it’s mentioned at all, but “game show” covers a range of programs that varies in width for each person.

Somewhere in the nexus of MTV’s trashy game shows, the physical challenge game shows, and the resentment toward others that fuels contestants on elimination-based reality shows and The Weakest Link alike is Dog Eat Dog. After training together for a day, six players vote to see which one is subjected to a challenge to avoid temporary elimination. If that player succeeds, though, he or she chooses the player who loses his or her chance at the big money. The last two compete to see who plays a trivia showdown against the other five players. That’s definitely a game show, but another NBC show adapted from overseas in that time period is hardly the kind of thing that could be given that label.

On Fear Factor, teams or individuals take part in stunts, with one team or individual being eliminated after each round. A program following such a format would usually be what one would consider a game show if it were lighter and had less demanding challenges, but the stunts are so dangerous that each episode begins with a disclaimer warning viewers not to try them, and the content is definitely not suited to those accustomed to game shows that are anything but abhorrent. The controversy surroun­ding rigged quiz shows of the ‘50s – no one in general would argue against calling them game shows – is of a much different nature from the notoriety that drew an indignant response from the American Humane Association, caused one particularly offensive episode of the revival to go unaired in the US, and made it so millions will not dignify the program by calling it a game show.

Even if you haven’t turned back on what you know about game shows, this has a chance of being a ridiculous question: is American Idol a game show? There’s a competition for a prize, and it certainly isn’t a sport or an awards show. Or is it, and by extension other talent compe­titions of its kind, a variety show? To be fair, talent competitions are not new on TV; Arthur Godfrey’s Talent Scouts had the top ratings of the 1951-52 season. Of course, Idol has many differences, including voting by phone instead of having to be in the studio audience to vote, ongoing competition instead of short-term competitions, and six years at the top of the ratings instead of just one. So talent competitions aren’t game shows. Where does that put The Gong Show, though?

The current talent competitions and some big-money game shows are blended in parts with reality competitions; they actually show a slice of the contestants’ lives and what goes on off the set instead of just having a short moment where the contestant recounts these things. It’s what separates programs that actually show date footage from Love Connection. Video from people’s lives, as well as elements of contempo­rary big-money game shows, distinguish Minute to Win It from any incarnation of Beat the Clock. But while The Gong Show is widely considered a game show for many reasons, Star Search doesn’t quite get that label, and American Idol is instead in a category it helped start.

Competitions to see who would be the best pop singer may not count as game shows, but shows that test knowledge of lyrics to songs fall under that banner, both the light competition The Singing Bee and the dramatic, big-money Don’t Forget the Lyrics! Though short-term cooking competitions like Ready Set Cook and Iron Chef could be called “game shows” in a loose sense, the same might not go for Top Chef, which follows a long-term elimination format. There are clear-cut distinctions between game shows and reality shows now that the latter has entered the vernacular, but shows from a different era of broadcasting might be lumped together with game shows even though they were not. In 2001, TV Guide ranked People are Funny among its 50 Greatest Game Shows of All Time, a list that also includes Survivor and Love Connection. There was a home game for This is Your Life, or at least a board game licensed by the show.

STRAY PARAGRAPH

Some game shows have one game to be played within the constraints of the time slot – or two in the case of the Pyramid shows – but others, from old-school shows like the daytime Match Game to big-money shows like Who Wants to Be a Millionaire, often start by joining a game in progress and finish by leaving a game in progress to be continued on the next episode. In that sense, each different game is not self-contained, but each game qualifies as short-term, even considering the element of returning champions. This is in contrast to reality competitions that eliminate one contestant from the pool every episode – or two in the case of American Idol.

OUTTAKES

As I type this, I have a football game on Fox in the background, and among the promos are for the latest season of American Idol and for yet another celebrity competition called Stars in Danger: The High Dive. This may force me to bring up recent offerings earlier than I would have.

Purists refuse to call Fear Factor a game show at all, and some may not know what to call it.

COMMENTS

I’ve been thinking about this since about 12:40 pm, and I type this sentence at 5:40 pm. I even brought the laptop downstairs so I could get a better view of the football games on TV. But that’s how much I’ll contemplate the topic. The length of this essay is almost 2,200 words after five hours of thinking.

Other topics I could bring up are British panel shows like Whose Line is it Anyway, Have I Got News for You, QI, I’m Sorry I Haven’t a Clue, and so on; the brief flirt with other forms of programming that GSN experienced in 2003… but I’d better keep it on topic.

I’m not sure where to put Takeshi’s Castle, Ninja Warrior, and/or Wipeout in the grand scheme of this paper without messing with it too much. And should I mention what I’ve heard about El Gran Juego de la Oca anywhere?

Early on, I intended for this to be a philosophical sort of thing, recalling a few of the things I looked at in philosophy classes.