Much discussion arose after the finish of the last world's series as to whether the adjustment of dates had worked satisfactorily. The contention was that playing off a tie game on the ground where the game had been scheduled might work some inconvenience to "fans" and result in an inequitable allotment of dates, simply to conform to custom.
It was asserted that the importance of the series demanded that it be a home-and-home affair, dates to alternate regularly, regardless of all ties or drawn games. To obtain opinion that is sound and practical the Editor of the GUIDE sent forth the following letter:
NEW YORK, January 31, 1913.
During the recent world's series it so happened that a tie was played in one of the cities, which compelled both teams to remain in that city for another date. Before the series was over this arrangement resulted in one club having five games on its home grounds and the other club having but three games on its home grounds.
It has seemed to some that it is unjust. It is also contended that it is unfair to the patrons of the game to schedule a contest and then not play in the city specified after some had traveled many miles to see it.
Will you please give the GUIDE your opinion as to whether a change would be advisable?
Very truly yours,
JOHN B. FOSTER, Editor Spalding's Official Base Ball Guide.
Answers were received to the request for a "symposium of opinion" as follows:
"So far as having any effect on the chances of the two teams is concerned, I don't think having to play more games on one ground than on the other makes any material difference. Where cities are sufficiently near each other for games to be alternated daily, it would perhaps be fairer to spectators to do so, irrespective of ties; yet it seems to me that a tie on one grounds should be played off the next day in the same city."