The additional two columns are the "what if" columns - what the winning percentage would be if the next game was a win or a loss for that team. This was really common in baseball newspapers for decades, especially before World War II.
I’m confused by those old clippings. The Washington team which began play in the AL in 1901 was officially called the Nationals? But commonly referred to by fans as the Senators?
There were no "official" nicknames at the time. That's an invention of the modern corporate world of baseball.
Team nicknames were given by those who wrote for the press. The Washington DC team had been known as the Nationals or Senators going back to the 1870s.
If you spend time reading original newspaper articles, this becomes apparent very quickly. Sadly, we tend to try to impose our modern understanding of the sport onto the past.
Actually, it was a lot more interesting without set nicknames. It gave a lot of literary license to journalists.
The standings list percent, win, lose after the won-loss record. I understand percent, but what to teh decimal fractions win and lose measure?
The additional two columns are the "what if" columns - what the winning percentage would be if the next game was a win or a loss for that team. This was really common in baseball newspapers for decades, especially before World War II.
I had assumed it was showing what a team’s win % will be if they ‘win’ their next game.. and what it will be if they ‘lose’ their next game.
But that doesn’t hold true if you use that calculation for the Athletics.
So I honestly have no idea.
I’m confused by those old clippings. The Washington team which began play in the AL in 1901 was officially called the Nationals? But commonly referred to by fans as the Senators?
There were no "official" nicknames at the time. That's an invention of the modern corporate world of baseball.
Team nicknames were given by those who wrote for the press. The Washington DC team had been known as the Nationals or Senators going back to the 1870s.
If you spend time reading original newspaper articles, this becomes apparent very quickly. Sadly, we tend to try to impose our modern understanding of the sport onto the past.
Actually, it was a lot more interesting without set nicknames. It gave a lot of literary license to journalists.