And in other news, the sky is blue . . . . (Pete Rose related)
 

There must be money in this for Rose:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2798498

Pete Rose revealed Wednesday that he bet on the Reds "every night" while he was manager of the team and that the Dowd Report was correct when it said he did so.

Rose spoke Wednesday with Dan Patrick and Keith Olbermann on ESPN Radio to discuss the new Pete Rose exhibit that will be on display at the Great American Ballpark as part of the Reds Hall of Fame. The exhibit will be on display for 11 months.

"I bet on my team every night. I didn't bet on my team four nights a week. I was wrong," Rose said.

Rose said that he believed in his team so much that he bet on them to win every night.

"I bet on my team to win every night because I love my team, I believe in my team," Rose said. "I did everything in my power every night to win that game."

They should let him into the Hall on the one condition that his plaque just read "Lying Douchebag".

What's wrong with betting that your team will win?

Well, let's say you trot that closer out there because he's the only one you trust to win the game. When you're 'just' trying to win games, maybe you pick your battles.

When you have money on the line, that changes the dynamics of what you're willing to do.

Now let's say that because you brought that pitcher out because in the back of your mind you're thinking about your bet, and now your closer blows out his shoulder. Your betting has just compromised the integrity of the game. Sure, it was in the name of 'winning,' but you did things because of your bet that you might not have done in 'normal' circumstances.

Well actually, betting every day wouldn't be as bad as betting 4 times a week. (Which is why he's using that line now) Because when you're betting 4 times a week, you're essentially betting against them the other 3 days (holding back your best relief pitchers, etc).

I don't believe any of it. He bet on his team to win sometimes, and lose when he didn't have confidence in his starter. Why people give him the benefit of the doubt on the winning/losing thing is beyond me. He used "inside info" just like any desperate gambler would.

Pete Rose rigged games. The fact that isn't common knowledge by now is amazing.

If he bets $100, $100, $100, $15000, $100, $100, $100, it's basically the same as picking his spots in my mind. I was a big Rose fan growing up but he doesn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame and his act since being banned is growing more and more tiresome.

Trying to win every single game is not the same thing as trying to win the most games within a season. In fact, you will almost certainly do much, much worse.

Show me a gambler that bets on the same major league baseball team to win every single game and I will show you proof that I fucked a centaur in the ass.

with or without a condom?

I figured you'd have some kind of emoticon for that.

i hope it was a female cenutar

The Dowd Report is online if anybody wants to read it. I haven't read it, but my understanding is that it never claimed that Rose bet on every single game. The report seems to be Rose's chief (only?) source of corroboration and it doesn't even do that.

Well I am a big Pete Rose guy. He did a bad thing. Let him in the Hall of Fame. I mean, for what it's worth, atleast he was betting to win every night... :(

this guy seems to find a new low everytime he opens his mouth...it's just sad now. a child's reaction to a punishment: deny the crime, then throw a bunch of different excuses at the wall to see what sticks. first it was that he only bet on his own team, now it's that he bet on his own team every night because he thought they'd win every single game (uh huh).

rose is so deluded...the quote where he says he should be managing because he'd win games and sell tickets is laughable, but the part where he says he's 'the greatest ambassador for baseball' is just stunning.

Such a shame. If onfield baseball contributions was the qualification ... there aren't many (if any) men that would be in the hall more soundly than Pete. A shame his off the field bullshit has kept him out.

He's truly a legend of the sport, and for that - I wish he could be in.

This is one of the reasons I think the Hall is a joke. Politics. Bullshit. Bottom line is a baseball Legend should be a hall of famer. And yes, I feel the same about Bonds & Joe Jackson.

Oh, and save me the holier than though bull. For gosh shakes, it isn't the "Major League Baseball Hall of players who were real good, and the media liked, and who carried themselves really well off the field too" .. It's simply the "Major League Baseball Hall of FAME". How is Pete Rose not in that ?

oh, man.

I'm torn here - part of me wants to see the proof because it would be cool to show that centaurs exist, but I really don't want to see Subby naked. Well, not so much naked as in a gimp suit but you know what I mean.

I'd take Pumpy's word for it, though. Let's find Subby his gambler and Pumpy can look at the pictures and verify that Subby's man-on-myth love is true.