Chapter II: Front Matter (2)

The detailed record of victories and defeats pitched in during the championship campaign of 1888 by those who pitched in at least five victories, is as follows. The names are given in the order of most victories and fewest defeats:

VICTORIES.

| | | P | | | | I | || | | | h | | | | n | || | | | i | | | | d | W || | | | l | | | P | i | a || V | N | | a | | | I | a | s || i | e | C | d | | D | t | n | h || c | w | h | e | B | e | t | a | i || t | | i | l | o | t | s | p | n || o | Y | c | p | s | r | b | o | g || r | o | a | h | t | o | u | l | t || i | r | g | i | o | i | r | i | o || e | k | o | a | n | t | g | s | n || s | . | . | . | . | . | . | . | . || . -----------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---++--- Keefe | --| 3| 5| 5| 5| 3| 8| 6|| 35 Clarkson | 5| --| 5| --| 6| 1| 5| 6|| 33 Conway | 5| 5| 5| 2| --| 5| 6| 3|| 31 Buffinton | 3| 4| --| 5| 2| 7| 5| 3|| 29 Morris | 6| 3| 4| 6| 3| --| 4| 3|| 29 Welch | --| 3| 5| 6| 1| 4| 3| 4|| 26 Krock | 5| --| 2| 3| 4| 3| 4| 4|| 25 Sanders | 0| 3| --| 3| 1| 3| 5| 4|| 19 Sowders | 3| 1| 2| --| 2| 4| 2| 5|| 19 Whitney | 3| 3| 4| 3| 1| 3| 2| --|| 19 Getzein | 0| 4| 4| 2| --| 2| 3| 3|| 18 O'Day | 1| 2| 3| 2| 3| 3| 2| --|| 16 Boyle | 2| 1| 2| 4| 2| 1| --| 3|| 15 Titcomb | --| 1| 2| 1| 3| 2| 1| 4|| 14 Casey | 1| 2| --| 2| 4| 2| 2| 1|| 14 Van Haltren| 0| --| 2| 1| 2| 2| 2| 4|| 13 Baldwin | 3| --| 1| 3| 2| 2| 2| 0|| 13 Staley | 0| 2| 0| 1| 1| --| 6| 3|| 12 Gruber | 2| 1| 1| 3| --| 1| 2| 1|| 11 Shreve | 2| 1| 0| 3| 3| 1| --| 1|| 11 Burdick | 1| 3| 0| 1| 1| 3| --| 1|| 10 Tener | 2| --| 0| 2| 1| 0| 1| 1|| 7 Madden | 0| 0| 2| --| 0| 3| 1| 1|| 7 Radbourne | 0| 1| 0| --| 2| 1| 0| 3|| 7 Gleason | 1| 0| --| 0| 0| 3| 1| 2|| 7 Crane | --| 1| 2| 0| 1| 0| 0| 1|| 5 Beatin | 0| 0| 0| 1| --| 1| 0| 3|| 5

DEFEATS | | | P | | | | I | || | | | h | | | | n | || | | | i | | | | d | W || | | | l | | | P | i | a || | N | | a | | | I | a | s || | e | C | d | | D | t | n | h || | w | h | e | B | e | t | a | i || D | | i | l | o | t | s | p | n || e | Y | c | p | s | r | b | o | g || f | o | a | h | t | o | u | l | t || e | r | g | i | o | i | r | i | o || a | k | o | a | n | t | g | s | n || s | . | . | . | . | . | . | . | . || . -----------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---++--- Tener | 1| --| 2| 0| 0| 0| 1| 1|| 5 Crane | --| 0| 0| 0| 1| 1| 2| 2|| 6 Beatin | 1| 2| 1| 2| --| 0| 1| 0|| 7 Titcomb | --| 1| 0| 1| 3| 2| 0| 1|| 8 Sanders | 3| 2| --| 2| 1| 1| 0| 1|| 10 Burdick | 1| 1| 3| 1| 1| 0| --| 3|| 10 Van Haltren| 2| --| 1| 2| 3| 2| 1| 0|| 11 Keefe | --| 4| 1| 4| 0| 1| 2| 0|| 12 Staley | 2| 1| 2| 2| 3| --| 1| 1|| 12 Madden | 3| 2| 2| --| 2| 2| 1| 0|| 12 Gruber | 3| 1| 2| 2| --| 0| 2| 3|| 13 Conway | 2| 2| 1| 2| --| 3| 1| 3|| 14 Krock | 2| --| 2| 3| 2| 3| 1| 1|| 14 Buffinton | 4| 2| --| 3| 2| 2| 1| 1|| 15 Sowders | 3| 2| 4| --| 2| 2| 2| 0|| 15 Baldwin | 1| --| 1| 1| 4| 4| 2| 2|| 15 Radbourne | 2| 5| 0| --| 2| 2| 2| 3|| 16 Gleason | 2| 3| --| 3| 3| 1| 0| 5|| 17 Welch | --| 6| 4| 3| 2| 2| 1| 1|| 19 Casey | 5| 1| --| 1| 5| 2| 3| 2|| 19 Clarkson | 4| 3| 4| --| 2| 2| 3| 2|| 20 Whitney | 4| 1| 2| 5| 2| 4| 3| --|| 21 Boyle | 5| 5| 3| 3| 1| 5| --| 0|| 22 Morris | 3| 4| 4| 2| 3| --| 2| 6|| 24 Shreve | 4| 4| 4| 2| 5| 3| --| 2|| 24 Galvin | 4| 3| 7| 5| 3| --| 1| 2|| 25 Getzein | 5| 3| 3| 4| --| 7| 3| 1|| 26 O'Day | 4| 5| 4| 5| 3| 3| 7| --|| 31

These pitching records not only present a tolerably fair criterion of a pitcher's skill in the box--though of course not as reliable as the data of clean earned runs off his pitching or of clean hits made from it--but they afford an interesting and instructive record from which to judge of the success of a pitcher in defeating one particular team more frequently than he does another, and vice versa. In fact, experience has shown that no matter how effective a pitcher may be in a season's work, it will be found that there is always one team which bothers him more than any other he has to face, just as shown in the above quoted instances.

In regard to judging of a pitcher's ability as a fielder in his position by the fielding averages of pitchers the basis was made equally as unreliable as the estimate of earned runs was, owing to the fact that the data of the fielding averages of a pitcher were made up from the figures of "assistance on strikes" as well as from legitimate fielding assistances. For this reason the pitcher, who was really a poor fielder in his position in fielding balls from the bat, but who happened to be fortunate in striking batsmen out by his pitching--thereby getting a big record of pitching assistances--became the leader in the pitcher's fielding averages; while the pitcher who really excelled as a fielder when in the box, but who was not as fortunate in striking out his batting opponents, and therefore could not furnish as good a record of assistances on strikes, was set down in the fielding averages as a tail-ender.

The individual club record of the pitching of 1888 presents some interesting figures. For instance, we find that while Chicago used no less than eleven pitchers during the championship season Philadelphia was content with but four. No less than twenty new pitchers entered the League season in 1888, and of these, Sanders of Philadelphia; Tener and Krock of Chicago; Sowders of Boston; Staley of Pittsburgh; Burdick of Indianapolis, and Widner of Washington, proved to be acquisitions.

Below will be found the individual club pitching records for 1888, showing the victories and defeats each club pitcher participated in as an occupant of the box. The names given in italics are those of pitchers new to the League arena:

EASTERN CLUBS.

NEW YORK.
| | P | | | | I | ||
| | h | | | | n | ||
| | i | | | | d | W ||
| | l | | | P | i | a ||
| | a | | | i | a | s ||
| C | d | | D | t | n | h ||
| h | e | B | e | t | a | i ||
| I | l | o | t | s | p | n ||
| c | p | s | r | b | o | g ||
| a | h | t | o | u | l | t ||
| g | i | o | i | r | i | o ||
| o | a | n | t | g | s | n ||
| . | . | . | . | . | . | . || Totals.
--------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.||W.|L.|P.
--------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
Keefe | 3| 4| 5| 2| 5| 4| 5| 0| 3| 1| 8| 2| 6| 0||35|12| 47
Welch | 3| 6| 5| 4| 6| 3| 1| 2| 4| 2| 3| 1| 4| 1||25|19| 45
Titcomb | 1| 1| 2| 0| 1| 1| 3| 3| 2| 2| 1| 0| 4| 1||14| 8| 22
_Crane_ | 1| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 1| 1| 0| 1| 0| 2| 1| 2|| 5| 6| 11
George | 0| 0| 2| 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 1| 1| 0| 0| 0|| 2| 1| 3
Weidman | 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 0|| 1| 1| 2
--------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
Totals | 8|11|14| 5|12| 8|11| 7| 9| 7|14| 5|15| 4||83|47|130
| | | | | | | | |[1]
[Footnote 1: One game with Pittsburg was won by forfeit.]

CHICAGO. | | P | | | | I | || | | h | | | | n | || | | i | | | | d | W || | | l | | | P | i | a || | N | a | | | i | a | s || | e | d | | D | t | n | h || | w | e | B | e | t | a | i || | | l | o | t | s | p | n || | Y | p | s | r | b | o | g || | o | h | t | o | u | l | t || | r | i | o | i | r | i | o || | k | a | n | t | g | s | n || | . | . | . | . | . | . | . || Totals. -----------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+--- |W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.||W.|L.|P. -----------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+--- _Krock_ | 5| 2| 2| 2| 3| 3| 4| 2| 3| 3| 4| 1| 4| 1||25|14|39 Van Haltren| 0| 2| 2| 1| 1| 2| 2| 3| 2| 2| 2| 1| 4| 0||13|11|24 Baldwin | 3| 1| 1| 1| 3| 1| 2| 4| 2| 4| 2| 2| 0| 2||13|15|28 _Tener_ | 2| 1| 0| 2| 2| 0| 1| 0| 0| 0| 1| 1| 1| 1|| 7| 5|12 _Dwyer_ | 0| 1| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 2| 0|| 4| 1| 5 _Borchers_ | 0| 0| 1| 1| 1| 0| 0| 1| 1| 2| 1| 0| 0| 1|| 4| 5| 9 Ryan | 1| 0| 1| 0| 0| 1| 1| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0|| 3| 1| 4 _Gumpert_ | 0| 1| 0| 1| 1| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 1| 2| 0|| 3| 3| 6 _Clark_ | 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 2| 0| 0| 0|| 2|| 0| 2 _Bryman_ | 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 0| 0| 1|| 2| 1| 3 _Mains_ | 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 0|| 1| 1| 2 -----------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+--- Totals |11| 8| 8| 9|12| 7|10|10| 9|11|14| 6|13| 6||77|57|134 | | | |[1]

[Footnote 1: One defeat with the Philadelphia Club was by forfeit.]

DETROIT.
| | | P | | | I | ||
| | | h | | | n | ||
| | | i | | | d | W ||
| | | l | | P | i | a ||
| N | | a | | i | a | s ||
| e | C | d | | t | n | h ||
| w | h | e | B | t | a | i ||
| | i | l | o | s | p | n ||
| Y | c | p | s | b | o | g ||
| o | a | h | t | u | l | t ||
| r | g | i | o | r | i | o ||
| k | o | a | n | g | s | n ||
| . | . | . | . | . | . | . || Totals.
-------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.||W.|L.|P.
-------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
Conway | 5| 2| 5| 2| 5| 1| 2| 2| 5| 3| 6| 1| 3| 3||31|14| 45
Getzein| 0| 5| 4| 3| 4| 3| 2| 4| 2| 7| 3| 3| 3| 1||18|26| 44
Gruber | 2| 3| 1| 1| 1| 2| 3| 2| 1| 0| 2| 3| 1| 3|| 1|13| 24
Beatin | 0| 1| 0| 2| 0| 1| 1| 2| 1| 0| 0| 1| 3| 0|| 5| 7| 12
Baldwin| 0| 0| 0| 2| 1| 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 1| 1| 0|| 3| 3| 6
-------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
Totals | 7|11|10|10|11| 7| 8|10|10|10|11| 8|11| 7||68|63|131

PHILADELPHIA.
| | | | | | I | ||
| | | | | | n | ||
| | | | | | d | W ||
| | | | | P | i | a ||
| N | | | | i | a | s ||
| e | C | | D | t | n | h ||
| w | h | B | e | t | a | i ||
| | i | o | t | s | p | n ||
| Y | c | s | r | b | o | g ||
| o | a | t | o | u | l | t ||
| r | g | o | i | r | i | o ||
| k | o | n | t | g | s | n ||
| . | . | . | . | . | . | . || Totals.
---------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|P.
---------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
Buffinton| 3| 4| 4| 2| 5| 3| 2| 2| 7| 2| 5| 1| 3| 1||29|15| 44
_Sanders_| 0| 3| 3| 2| 3| 2| 1| 1| 3| 1| 5| 0| 4| 1||19|10| 29
Casey | 1| 5| 2| 1| 2| 1| 4| 5| 2| 2| 2| 3| 1| 2||14|19| 33
_Gleason_| 1| 2| 0| 3| 0| 3| 0| 3| 3| 1| 1| 0| 2| 5|| 7|17| 24
---------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
Totals | 4|14| 9| 8|10| 9| 7|11|15| 6|13| 4|10| 9||69|71|130
| | |[1] | | | | |[2]

[Footnote 1: One game with Chicago was won by forfeit.] [Footnote 2: One game with Pittsburg thrown out.]

BOSTON.
| | | P | | | I | ||
| | | h | | | n | ||
| | | i | | | d | W ||
| | | l | | P | i | a ||
| N | | a | | i | a | s ||
| e | C | d | D | t | n | h ||
| w | h | e | e | t | a | i ||
| | i | l | t | s | p | n ||
| Y | c | p | r | b | o | g ||
| o | a | h | o | u | l | t ||
| r | g | i | i | r | i | o ||
| k | o | a | t | g | s | n ||
| . | . | . | . | . | . | . || Totals.
---------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.||W.|L.|P.
---------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
Clarkson | 5| 4| 5| 3| 5| 4| 6| 2| 1| 2| 5| 3| 6| 2||33|20| 53
_Sowders_| 3| 3| 1| 2| 2| 4| 2| 2| 4| 2| 2| 2| 5| 0||19|15| 34
Madden | 0| 3| 0| 2| 2| 2| 0| 2| 3| 2| 1| 1| 1| 0|| 7|12| 19
Radbourne| 0| 2| 1| 5| 0| 0| 2| 2| 1| 2| 0| 2| 3| 3|| 7|16| 23
Conway | 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 3| 1| 0| 0|| 4| 1| 5
---------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
Totals | 8|12| 7|10| 9|10|10| 8|10| 8|11| 9|15| 5||70|64|134

INDIANAPOLIS.
| | | P | | | | ||
| | | h | | | | ||
| | | i | | | | W ||
| | | l | | | P | a ||
| N | | a | | | i | s ||
| e | C | d | | D | t | h ||
| w | h | e | B | e | t | i ||
| | i | l | o | t | s | n ||
| Y | c | p | s | r | b | g ||
| o | a | h | t | o | u | t ||
| r | g | i | o | i | r | o ||
| k | o | a | n | t | g | n ||
| . | . | . | . | . | . | . || Totals.
---------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.||W.|L.|P.
---------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
Boyle | 2| 5| 1| 5| 2| 3| 4| 3| 2| 1| 1| 5| 3| 0||15|22| 37
Healy | 0| 3| 1| 4| 2| 2| 1| 3| 2| 3| 1| 6| 5| 3||12|24| 36
Shreve | 2| 4| 1| 4| 0| 4| 3| 2| 3| 5| 1| 3| 1| 2||11|24| 35
_Burdick_| 1| 1| 3| 1| 0| 3| 1| 1| 1| 1| 3| 0| 1| 3||10|10| 20
Moffat | 0| 1| 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 2| 0| 1| 0| 0| 2| 0|| 2| 5| 7
---------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
Totals | 5|14| 6|14| 4|13| 9|11| 8|11| 6|14|12| 8||50|85|135

WASHINGTON.
| | | P | | | | I ||
| | | h | | | | n ||
| | | i | | | | d ||
| | | l | | | P | i ||
| N | | a | | | i | a ||
| e | C | d | | D | t | n ||
| w | h | e | B | e | t | a ||
| | i | l | o | t | s | p ||
| Y | c | p | s | r | b | o ||
| o | a | h | t | o | u | l ||
| r | g | i | o | i | r | i ||
| k | o | a | n | t | g | s ||
| . | . | . | . | . | . | . || Totals.
----------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.||W.|L.|P.
----------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
Whitney | 3| 4| 3| 1| 4| 2| 3| 5| 1| 2| 3| 4| 2| 3||18|21| 40
O'Day | 1| 4| 2| 5| 3| 4| 2| 5| 3| 3| 3| 3| 2| 7||16|31| 47
Keefe | 0| 2| 0| 2| 0| 1| 0| 1| 2| 1| 2| 0| 2| 0|| 6| 7| 13
_Widner_ | 0| 1| 0| 2| 1| 2| 0| 2| 1| 0| 1| 0| 1| 0|| 4| 7| 11
Daily | 0| 0| 1| 1| 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 2| 0| 0| 1| 0|| 2| 4| 6
Gilmore | 0| 3| 0| 0| 1| 1| 0| 1| 0| 2| 0| 2| 0| 1|| 1|10| 11
_Greening_| 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0|| 0| 1| 1
_Haddock_ | 0| 1| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0|| 0| 2| 2
Shaw | 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 0| 1|| 0| 3| 3
----------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+---
Totals | 4|15| 6|13| 9|10| 5|15| 7|11| 9|10| 8|12||48|86|134

PITTSBURG.
| | | P | | | I | ||
| | | h | | | n | ||
| | | i | | | d | W ||
| | | l | | | i | a ||
| N | | a | | | a | s ||
| e | C | d | | D | n | h ||
| w | h | e | B | e | a | i ||
| | i | l | o | t | p | n ||
| Y | c | p | s | r | o | g ||
| o | a | h | t | o | l | t ||
| r | g | i | o | i | i | o ||
| k | o | a | n | t | s | n ||
| . | . | . | . | . | . | . || Totals.
-----------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+-----++-+--+---
|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.||W.|L.|P.
-----------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+-----++-+--+---
Morris | 6| 3| 3| 4| 4| 4| 6| 2| 3| 3| 4| 2| 3| 6||29|24| 53
Galvin | 1| 4| 5| 3| 2| 7| 1| 5| 6| 3| 5| 1| 3| 2||23|25| 48
_Staley_ | 0| 2| 2| 1| 0| 2| 1| 2| 1| 3| 5| 1| 3| 1||12|12| 24
_Knell_ | 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 1| 1| 0|| 1| 2| 3
_Henderson_| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 1| 0| 1| 0| 1| 0| 1| 0| 0|| 1| 4| 5
Maul | 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0|| 0| 1| 1
-----------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+-----++-+--+---
Totals | 7| 9|11| 9| 6|15| 8|10|10|10|14| 6|10| 9||66|68|134
|[1] | | | |[1]

[Footnote 1: One game with New York was forfeited, and one defeat with Philadelphia was thrown out.]

The retiring pitchers of the year were McCormick of Pittsburgh, Ferguson of Philadelphia, who died early in the season; Weidman and Twitchell of Detroit; Shaw of Washington; Mattimore of New York; Pyle and Sprague of Chicago; Leitner, Morrison and Kirby of Indianapolis, and Stemmyer of Boston

THE MONTHLY RECORDS.

The month of _April_ saw Boston taking the lead in the record of victories for that month, that club not sustaining a single defeat in April. Chicago stood second, with New York and Pittsburgh tied in the number of victories and defeats credited and charged to each club, Detroit standing fifth, while Indianapolis, Philadelphia and Washington brought up the rear.

_In May_ Chicago led all the other teams in their victories that month; Detroit being second, Philadelphia third, New York fourth, and Boston fifth, Indianapolis being sixth, with Pittsburgh and Washington tied for last place in the May record, Boston and Pittsburgh falling off badly this month.

_In June_ Detroit won the most victories, it being their best month's work of the season, Chicago being second, Philadelphia third, New York fourth, Boston fifth, Washington sixth, with Indianapolis seventh and Pittsburgh last, it being the latter club's poorest month's work of the campaign.

_In July_ the new rule of management, inaugurated by Mr. Day, placed New York in the front, and the result was that the "Giants" in July made the best month's record of the season, over 18 victories to but five defeats; Detroit stood second on the list in July victories, with Pittsburgh third, the latter making a good rally in July; Indianapolis, too, played well this month and stood fourth, Washington being fifth, and Chicago sixth, the latter taking a bad tumble, Philadelphia and Boston being the two last in July victories, Boston winning but five victories out of twenty-two games, that club's worst monthly record.

_In August_ Boston rallied in brilliant style, scoring 16 victories out of 22 games, quite a contrast to their poor work in July; New York was second, and Pittsburgh third, the latter doing better, even, than in July; Philadelphia stood fourth, Chicago fifth, Washington sixth, with Indianapolis seventh and Detroit last, the latter only winning five victories out of 21 games in August.

_In September_ Chicago rallied well and went to the front in the record of the month's victories, Pittsburgh being second, New York third, Detroit fourth--the latter rallying; Philadelphia sixth, with Indianapolis and Washington bringing up the rear. By the close of the month New York had virtually settled the question of the championship, and the only struggle left was that for second place.

_In October_ Philadelphia made its usual "spurt" at the finish, and that club won eight out of nine games in October, after giving Chicago a close fight for second place, and came in a good third in the pennant race. New York was second in the October victories, Boston third, Pittsburgh and Washington tied for fourth, Chicago was sixth--that club gaining second position in the pennant race; Indianapolis and Washington being the two last. Here is the full record of the monthly victories and defeats of the campaign:

|April| May | June| July| Aug.|Sept.| Oct.||Totals. ------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----++--------- |W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.||W.|L.|P. New York | 5| 3|12| 9|13|11|18| 5|16| 8|13| 8| 7| 3||84|47|131 Chicago | 6| 2|15| 7|14| 8|10|14|12|13|16| 9| 4| 5||77|58|135 Philadelphia| 2| 7|12| 7|13|10| 9|15|15| 9|10|12| 8| 1||69|61|130 Boston | 9| 0|11|13|12|11| 5|17|16| 6|12|12| 5| 5||70|64|134 Detroit | 3| 5|14| 8|16| 6|14|10| 5|16|13|11| 3| 7||68|63|131 Pittsburg | 5| 3| 7|14| 5|15|13| 9|16| 9|15|12| 5| 6||66|68|134 Indianapolis| 2| 6| 8|14| 7|14|13|11| 6|21|10|13| 4| 6||50|85|135 Washington | 1| 7| 7|14| 9|14|11|12|10|14| 5|19| 5| 6||48|86|134

THE LEADING PLAYERS OF THE LEAGUE.

Looking over the League averages, and taking those players who have taken part in a majority of the championship contests of the season, we find the appended names among those occupying the leading positions at the bat and in the field.

Of those who played in one hundred games and over in the League championship arena, the following comprise the first ten batsmen:

|BATSMEN. |CLUB. |Games.|Per cent. of | | | |Base Hits. --+---------+--------+------+--------- 1|Anson |Chicago | 134 | .343 2|Ryan |Chicago | 130 | .331 3|Kelly |Boston | 105 | .318 4|Brouthers|Detroit | 129 | .306 5|Ewing |New York| 103 | .306 6|White |Detroit | 125 | .298 7|Johnston |Boston | 135 | .295 8|Tiernan |New York| 113 | .293 9|Connor |New York| 134 | .291 10|Nash |Boston | 135 | .283

Of those who played in one hundred games and over in the League campaign, the following are the first seven in fielding averages:

FIELDERS. |POSITION. |CLUB. |Games.|Fielding|Per cent. | | | |Average.| of | | | | |Base Hits. ----------+--------------+---------+------+--------+---------- Anson |First Baseman |Chicago | 134 | .985 | .343 Richardson|Second Baseman|New York | 135 | .942 | .226 Nash |Third Baseman |Boston. | 104 | .913 | .283 Glasscock |Short Stop |Ind'polis| 109 | .900 | .269 Hornung |Left Fielder |Boston | 107 | .947 | .239 Slattery |Center Fielder|New York | 103 | .917 | .245 Tiernan |Right Fielder |New York | 113 | .959 | .293

Of the pitchers who took part in 50 games and over, the following led in fielding averages:

No pitcher or catcher played in 100 games.

PITCHERS.|CLUB. |Games.|Fielding|Per cent. | | |Average.| of | | | |Base Hits. ---------+---------+------+--------+---------- Keefe |New York | 51 | .785 | .127 Galvin |Pittsburg| 50 | .758 | .143 Morris |Pittsburg| 54 | .732 | .102 Clarkson |Boston | 54 | .678 | .195

Of the catchers who took part in 60 games and over, the following led in fielding averages:

CATCHERS.|CLUB. |Games.|Fielding|Per cent. | | |Average.| of | | | |Base Hits. ---------+------------+------+--------+---------- Bennett |Detroit | 72 | .941 | .263 Daly |Chicago | 62 | .880 | .191 Clements |Philadelphia| 84 | .874 | .247 Ewing |New York | 78 | .861 | .306 Mack |Washington | 79 | .843 | .186 Miller |Pittsburg | 68 | .805 | .277 Kelly |Boston | 74 | .796 | .318

THE BASE RUNNING RECORD.

Those of the League championship players who are credited with not less than 50 stolen bases in the pennant race, are as follows:

BASERUNNERS.|CLUB. |Games.|Stolen Bases. ------------+------------+------+----------- Hoy |Washington | 136 | 82 Seery |Indianapolis| 133 | 80 Sunday |Pittsburg | 119 | 71 Pfeffer |Chicago | 136 | 64 Ryan |Chicago | 130 | 60 Fogarty |Philadelphia| 120 | 58 Kelly |Boston | 105 | 56 Ewing |New York | 103 | 53 Tiernan |New York | 113 | 52

The above are the leaders in seven of the eight League clubs. Hanlon led in the Detroit team, but he only scored 38 stolen bases in 108 games. The Detroit team was singularly weak in this respect.

Mr. R.M. Larner of Washington has made up an interesting table from the figures of the League averages, which presents some very interesting statistics of the base running in the League during the championship season of 1888. Mr. Larner says:

"The official averages of League players contain the number of bases stolen by each player during the season, but furnish no means of comparison between the clubs in that most important department of the game. A glance, however, shows that the three tail-end clubs possess the three most successful base-runners in the League, in Hoy of the Washingtons, Seery of Indianapolis, and Sunday of Pittsburgh, the latter of whom would probably have finished first had an accident not prevented him from playing during the last two weeks of the season."

The following table includes in its first column all those methods of reaching first base, except the force-outs, which cannot be ascertained, and would not materially affect the record, in this comparison. Indianapolis and Washington still lead, Pittsburgh comes well to the front, pushing the next three clubs down a peg each, and the Phillies and Detroits keep their places at the foot:

CLUBS. |Reached 1st Base.|Stolen Bases.|Percentages. ------------+-----------------+-------------+----------- Indianapolis| 1,589 | 350 | .220 Washington | 1,515 | 331 | .218 Pittsburg | 1,474 | 282 | .191 New York | 1,772 | 315 | .178 Boston | 1,719 | 292 | .170 Chicago | 1,720 | 285 | .166 Philadelphia| 1,569 | 246 | .157 Detroit | 1,843 | 193 | .105

Mr. Larner says. "The simple total of bases stolen is misleading as to a club's proficiency in base running, since the strong batting clubs having more men who reach first base have more chances to steal, and hence excel in totals, while in percentages they fall below clubs which are weaker in batting. The true measure is the relation between the number of bases stolen and the number of chances offered for the attempt, which is the whole number of those who reach first base, whether on hits, balls, errors, hits by pitcher, illegal delivery, or force-outs."

THE CLUB RECORD OF STOLEN BASES.

The record in stolen bases in championship games, showing the first man of each club in base stealing for 1888 is appended.

WASHINGTON. ||PITTSBURG. | | |Stolen|| | | |Stolen |PLAYERS.|Games.|Bases.|| |PLAYERS.|Games.|Bases. -+--------+------+------++-+--------+------+------- 1|Hoy | 136 | 82 ||1|Sunday | 119 | 71 2|Wilmot | 119 | 46 ||2|Smith | 130 | 32 3|Donnelly| 117 | 44 ||3|Dunlap | 81 | 24 4|Daily | 110 | 44 ||4|Mider | 103 | 27 5|Mack | 85 | 31 ||5|Beckley | 71 | 20 6|Schock | 90 | 23 ||6|Carroll | 96 | 18 7|Myers | 132 | 20 ||7|Kuehne | 137 | 17 8|Irwin | 37 | 15 ||8|Coleman | 115 | 15 9|O'Brien | 133 | 10 ||9|Fields | 44 | 9 -+--------+------+------++-+--------+------+------- Total | 315 ||Total | 228

NEW YORK. || PHILADELPHIA. | | |Stolen|| | | |Stolen |PLAYERS. |Games.|Bases.|| |PLAYERS. |Games.|Bases. -+----------+------+------++-+-------=-+------+------- 1|Ewing | 105 | 53 ||1|Fogart | 120 | 58 2|Tiernan | 113 | 52 ||2|Delahanty| 74 | 38 3|Ward | 122 | 38 ||3|Andrews | 123 | 35 4|Richardson| 135 | 35 ||4|Farrar | 130 | 21 5|Connor | 134 | 27 ||5|Wood | 105 | 20 6|Slattery | 103 | 26 ||6|Irwin | 124 | 19 7|O'Rourke | 107 | 25 ||7|Mulvey | 99 | 18 8|Gore | 64 | 9 ||8|Sanders | 57 | 13 9|Whitney | 90 | 8 ||9|Bastian | 80 | 12 -+----------+------+------++-+---------+------+------- Total | 280 ||Total | 234

Taking the total bases stolen by each club nine as the criterion, Indianapolis takes the lead, with Washington second and New York third, followed by Chicago, Boston, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and Detroit in regular order, the latter club being the weakest of the eight League teams in base running. Here is the record in full:

INDIANAPOLIS. || BOSTON. | | |Stolen|| | | |Stolen |PLAYERS. |Games.|Bases.|| |PLAYERS. |Games.|Bases. -+----------+------+------++-+---------+------+------- 1|Seery | 133 | 80 ||1|Kelly | 105 | 56 2|McGeachy | 118 | 49 ||2|Brown | 107 | 46 3|Glasscock | 112 | 48 ||3|Johnston | 135 | 35 4|Denny | 126 | 32 ||4|Wise | 104 | 33 5|Hines | 132 | 31 ||5|Hornung | 107 | 29 6|Myers | 66 | 28 ||6|Morrill | 134 | 21 7|Bossett | 128 | 24 ||7|Nash | 135 | 20 8|Daily | 57 | 15 ||8|Quinn | 38 | 12 9|Esterbrook| 64 | 11 ||9|Sutton | 28 | 10 -+----------+------+------++-+---------+------+------- Total | 318 ||Total | 263

CHICAGO. || DETROIT. | | |Stolen|| | | |Stolen |PLAYERS. |Games.|Bases.|| |PLAYERS. |Games.|Bases. -+-----------+------+------++-+----------+------+------- 1|Pfeffer | 136 | 64 ||1|Hanlon | 108 | 38 2|Ryan | 130 | 60 ||2|Brouthers | 129 | 34 3|Burns | 134 | 34 ||3|Campau | 70 | 27 4|Anson | 134 | 28 ||4|Twitchell | 130 | 14 5|Williamson | 132 | 25 ||5|Richardson| 57 | 13 6|Van Haltren| 81 | 21 ||6|White | 125 | 12 7|Duffy | 71 | 13 ||7|Ganzell | 93 | 12 8|Daly | 65 | 10 ||8|Rowe | 105 | 10 9|Sullivan | 75 | 9 ||9|Getzein | 45 | 6 -+-----------+------+------++-+----------+------+------- Total | 264 ||Total | 166

The following table is for immediate reference. It shows the winning club for each season from 1871 to 1888 inclusive; as also the manager of each of the champion clubs of each year:

Year.|WINNING CLUB.|MANAGER. |Victories.|Defeats.|Games | | | | |Played. -----+-------------+---------+----------+--------+------- 1871 |Athletic |Hayhurst | 22 | 7 | 29 1872 |Boston |H. Wright| 39 | 8 | 47 1873 |Boston |H. Wright| 43 | 16 | 59 1874 |Boston |H. Wright| 52 | 18 | 70 1875 |Boston |H. Wright| 71 | 8 | 79 1876 |Chicago |Spalding | 52 | 14 | 66 1877 |Boston |H. Wright| 31 | 17 | 48 1878 |Boston |H. Wright| 41 | 19 | 60 1879 |Providence |G. Wright| 55 | 23 | 78 1880 |Chicago |Anson | 67 | 18 | 84 1881 |Chicago |Anson | 56 | 28 | 84 1882 |Chicago |Anson | 55 | 29 | 84 1883 |Boston |H. Wright| 63 | 35 | 98 1884 |Providence |Bancroft | 84 | 28 | 112 1885 |Chicago |Anson | 87 | 25 | 112 1886 |Chicago |Anson | 90 | 34 | 124 1887 |Detroit |Watkins | 79 | 45 | 124 1888 |NewYork |Mutrie | 84 | 47 | 131

It will be seen that in the old Professional Association the Boston club won the pennant four times, and the Athletics once, while in the League the Chicago Club won it six times, the Boston Club three times, the Providence Club twice, and the Detroit and New York once each. The best percentage of victories was made by the Boston Club in 1875, that being the best on record in professional club history.

THE CHAMPION LEAGUE TEAM OF 1888.

Though the New York Club's team for 1888 included over twenty different players, only seven of them took part in one hundred championship matches and over, and these were Richardson, 135; Connor, 134; Ward, 122; Tiernan, 113; O'Rourke, 107; Ewing, 103, and Slattery, 103. Whitney took part in 90; Gore in 64; Keefe in 51; Welch in 47; Foster in 37; Murphy in 28; Hatfield in 27; Titcomb in 23; Brown in 17, and Crane in but 11. All the others played in less than ten games. The first nine were Keefe p, Ewing c, Connor 1b, Richardson 2b, Whitney 3b, Ward ss, O'Rourke lf, Slattery cf, and Tiernan, rf, these playing the nine positions respectively. The appended table presents an interesting epitome of the work done on the field by the New York team in the championship contests of the past season:

NEW YORK. vs. | | P | | | | I | || | | h | | | | n | || | | i | | | | d | W || | | l | | | P | i | a || | | a | | | i | a | s || | C | d | | D | t | n | h || | h | e | B | e | t | a | i || T | i | l | o | t | s | p | n || o | c | p | s | r | b | o | g || t | a | h | t | o | u | l | t || a | g | i | o | i | r | i | o || l | o | a | n | t | g | s | n || s | . | . | . | . | . | . | . || . --------------------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---++--- Victories | 8 |14 |12 |11 |10 |14 |15 || 84 Defeats |11 | 5 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 4 || 47 Drawn Games | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 || 7 Series Won | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 || 5 Series Lost | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 || 1 Series Unfinished | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 || 6 Victories by Forfeit| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 || 1 "Chicago" Victories | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 6 || 19 "Chicago" Defeats | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 || 3 Single Figure | 5 |12 |10 |11 | 8 |11 |14 || 71 Victories | | | | | | | || Single Figure |11 | 4 | 8 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 4 || 44 Defeats | | | | | | | || Double Figure | 3 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2 || 13 Victories | | | | | | | || Double Figure | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 || 4 Defeats | | | | | | | || Extra Inning Games | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 || 9 Victories at Home | 4 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 || 43 Defeats at Home | 5 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 3 || 23 Victories Abroad | 4 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 4 | 7 | 7 || 40 Defeats Abroad | 6 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 1 || 24

THE PITCHING RECORD.

The pitching record of the champion team of 1888 is worthy of note in regard to the figures showing the victories won and defeats sustained by each pitcher in his games with the seven opposing clubs. Here is the record in full, the names being given in the order of percentage of victories. Despite this method of estimating the pitching strength there is no questioning the fact of the superiority of Keefe, Welch and Titcomb according to the record each made against the clubs they were opposed to:

[**Proofreaders note: In some cases the caption identifying the players was indecipherable. These are marked with an *]

| | P | | | | I | || |P
| | h | | | | n | || |e
| | i | | | | d | W || |r
| | l | | | P | i | a || | V
| | a | | | i | a | s || |c i
| C | d | | D | t | n | h || |e c
| h | e | B | e | t | a | i || T |n t
| i | l | o | t | s | p | n || o |t o
| c | p | s | r | b | o | g || t |. r
| a | h | t | o | u | l | t || a | i
| g | i | o | i | r | i | o || l |o e
| o | a | n | t | g | s | n || s |f s
| . | . | . | . | . | . | . || . | .
-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----++-----+-----
|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.|W.|L.||W.|L.|
-------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+-----
Keefe | 3| 4| 5| 1| 5| 4| 5| 0| 3| 1| 8| 2| 6| 0||35|12|.744
George | 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 1| 1| 0| 0| 0|| 2| 1|.666
Titcomb| 1| 1| 2| 0| 1| 1| 3| 3| 2| 2| 1| 0| 4| 1||14| 8|.636
Welsh | 3| 6| 5| 4| 6| 3| 1| 2| 4| 2| 3| 1| 4| 1||26|19|.577
Weidman| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 1| 0| 0| 0|| 1| 1|.500
Crane | 1| 0| 2| 0| 0| 0| 1| 1| 0| 1| 0| 2| 1| 2|| 5| 6|.450
-------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+-----
Totals | 8|11|14| 5|12| 8|11| 7| 9| 7|14| 5|15| 4||83|47|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |[1]

[Footnote 1: The game forfeited by Pittsburg is, of course, not included.]

In the pitching averages, based on the existing method of estimating earned runs off the pitching, the record stands as follows:

Pitchers.|Per cent. earn'd|Per cent. of |Runs per Game. |Base Hits. Keefe | 1.4* | .198 | [B] | Welch | 1.47 | .201 Titcomb | 1.82 | .212

[**Proofreaders note B: * undecipherable number**]

The other three pitchers did not pitch in a dozen games.

THE FULL LEAGUE RECORD.

The following record presents the scores of the total victories won by every League Club each year since the National League was organized, the table presenting the figures of thirteen consecutive seasons from 1876 to 1888 inclusive:

| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | Y | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | r | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | s | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | . ------------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+--- Chicago | 52| 18| 30| 44| 67| 56| 55| 59| 62| 87| 90| 71| 77|13 Boston | 39| 31| 41| 49| 40| 38| 45| 63| 73| 46| 56| 61| 70|13 Providence | --| --| 38| 55| 52| 47| 52| 58| 84| 53| --| --| --| 8 Detroit | --| --| --| --| --| 41| 42| 40| 28| 41| 87| 79| 68| 8 Buffalo | --| --| --| 44| 24| 45| 45| 52| 64| 38| --| --| --| 7 Cleveland | --| --| --| 24| 47| 36| 42| 55| 35| --| --| --| --| 6 New York | --| --| --| --| --| --| --| 46| 62| 85| 75| 68| 84| 6 Philadelphia| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| 17| 39| 56| 71| 75| 69| 6 St Louis | 45| 19| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| 38| 43| --| --| 4 Cincinnati | 9| --| 37| 38| 21| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| 4 Troy | --| --| --| 19| 41| 39| 35| --| --| --| --| --| --| 4 Worcester | --| --| --| --| 40| 32| 18| --| --| --| --| --| --| 3 Washington | --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| 26| 46| 48| 3 Indianapolis| --| --| 24| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| 37| 59| 3 Hartford | 47| 24| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| 2 Louisville | 30| 28| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| 2 Pittsburg | --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| 55| 66| 2 Athletic | 14| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| 1 Mutual | 21| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| 1 Syracuse | --| --| --| 15| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| 1 Milwaukee | --| --| 15| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| 1 Kansas City | --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| 29| --| 1 ------------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+--- Totals |257|120|185|288|332|334|334|390|447|444|448|521|541|

THE COMPLETE RECORD.

Following is a summary showing the results of each year's campaign since the organization of the League:

1876. |Won |Lost|Per cent. -----------+----+----+-------- Chicago | 52 | 14 | .788 Hartford | 47 | 21 | .691 St. Louis | 45 | 19 | .703 Boston | 39 | 31 | .557 Louisville | 30 | 36 | .455 Mutual | 21 | 35 | .375 Athletic | 14 | 45 | .237 Cincinnati | 9 | 56 | .135

1877. |Won |Lost|Per cent. -----------+----+----+-------- Boston | 31 | 17 | .648 Louisville | 28 | 20 | .583 Hartford | 24 | 24 | .500 St. Louis | 19 | 29 | .396 Chicago | 18 | 30 | .375

1878. |Won |Lost|Per cent. -------------+----+----+-------- Boston | 41 | 19 | .707 Cincinnati | 37 | 23 | .617 Providence | 33 | 27 | .550 Chicago | 30 | 30 | .500 Indianapolis | 24 | 36 | .400 Milwaukee | 15 | 45 | .250

1879. |Won |Lost|Per cent. -----------+----+----+-------- Providence | 55 | 23 | .705 Boston | 49 | 29 | .628 Chicago | 44 | 32 | .579 Buffalo | 44 | 32 | .579 Cincinnati | 38 | 36 | .514 Cleveland | 24 | 53 | .312 Troy | 19 | 56 | .253 Syracuse | 15 | 27 | .357

1880. |Won |Lost|Per cent. -----------+----+----+-------- Chicago | 67 | 17 | .798 Providence | 52 | 32 | .619 Cleveland | 47 | 37 | .559 Troy | 41 | 42 | .494 Worcester | 40 | 43 | .482 Boston | 40 | 44 | .474 Buffalo | 24 | 58 | .293 Cincinnati | 21 | 59 | .263

1881. |Won |Lost|Per cent. -----------+----+----+-------- Chicago | 56 | 28 | .667 Providence | 47 | 37 | .559 Buffalo | 45 | 38 | .542 Detroit | 41 | 43 | .488 Troy | 39 | 45 | .464 Boston | 38 | 45 | .458 Cleveland | 36 | 48 | .429 Worcester | 32 | 50 | .390

1882. |Won |Lost|Per cent. -----------+----+----+-------- Chicago | 55 | 29 | .655 Providence | 52 | 32 | .619 Buffalo | 45 | 39 | .536 Boston | 45 | 39 | .536 Cleveland | 42 | 40 | .512 Detroit | 42 | 41 | .506 Troy | 35 | 48 | .422 Worcester | 18 | 66 | .214

1883. |Won |Lost|Per cent. ------------+----+----+-------- Boston | 63 | 35 | .643 Chicago | 59 | 39 | .602 Providence | 58 | 40 | .592 Cleveland | 55 | 42 | .567 Buffalo | 52 | 45 | .539 New York | 46 | 50 | .479 Detroit | 40 | 58 | .408 Philadelphia| 17 | 81 | .173

1884. |Won |Lost|Per cent. ------------+----+----+-------- Providence | 84 | 28 | .750 Boston | 73 | 38 | .658 Buffalo | 64 | 47 | .577 Chicago | 62 | 50 | .554 New York | 62 | 50 | .554 Philadelphia| 39 | 73 | .348 Cleveland | 35 | 77 | .313 Detroit | 28 | 84 | .250

1885. |Won |Lost|Per cent. ------------+----+----+-------- Chicago | 87 | 25 | .776 New York | 85 | 27 | .758 Philadelphia| 56 | 54 | .509 Providence | 53 | 57 | .481 Boston | 46 | 66 | .410 Detroit | 41 | 67 | .379 Buffalo | 38 | 74 | .339 St. Louis | 36 | 72 | .333

1886. |Won |Lost|Per cent. ------------+----+----+-------- Chicago | 90 | 34 | .725 Detroit | 87 | 36 | .707 New York | 75 | 44 | .630 Philadelphia| 71 | 43 | .622 Boston | 56 | 61 | .478 St. Louis | 43 | 79 | .352 Kansas City | 30 | 91 | .247 Washington | 28 | 92 | .233

1887. |Won|Lost|Per cent. ------------+----+----+-------- Detroit | 79 | 45 | .637 Philadelphia| 75 | 48 | .610 Chicago | 71 | 50 | .587 New York | 68 | 55 | .553 Boston | 61 | 60 | .504 Pittsburg | 55 | 69 | .444 Indianapolis| 46 | 76 | .377 Washington | 37 | 89 | .294

1888. |Won |Lost|Per cent. ------------+----+----+-------- New York | 84 | 47 | .641 Chicago | 77 | 58 | .510 Philadelphia| 69 | 61 | .531 Boston | 70 | 64 | .522 Detroit | 68 | 63 | .519 Pittsburg | 66 | 68 | .493 Indianapolis| 50 | 85 | .370 Washington | 48 | 86 | .358

A summary of the above shows that the Chicago club won the championship six times; the Boston club three times; the Providence club twice, and the Detroit and New York clubs once each. The Chicago club has the best record of a single season--90 victories and 34 defeats-and the highest percentage of victories .798. The only clubs which played in every single season were the Chicago and Boston clubs.

THE LEAGUE AVERAGES FOR 1888.

The following is the official batting record of players members of League Clubs who have taken part in fifteen or more championship games.

SEASON OF 1888.