I have hair that touches my shoulders, i'm sick of straightening it, since i have natural curly hair,i might as well perm the straight parts and let my hair grow out, what should i dO??
I have straightened hair, but my roots are curly, should i perm my hair or straighten it?
Introduction:
This project was about the overall cost of owning a car for 5 years is. It will include the MSRP, cost of gas, and cost of oil. The project will also include Carbon Dioxide emissions, heat combustion and production, and other statistics.
Car Choice:
I chose to do my report on the 2007 Saab 9-5 manual sedan. The MSRP of this car is $35,440. I made my decision base on the fact that I already own a 1998 Saab. I thought that it would be interesting to find out the cost of owning a 2007 Saab. The Saab is said to have an estimated 20 mpg city and 30 mpg highway. The fuel tank will hold 18.5 gallons and the oil tank will hold 4.1 quarts.
Calculations:
First of all I will be using regular 88 octane gas and also regular oil.
Gas Costs
In one year I will drive the car 4,900 miles on local roads (14,000 miles x 35% driving on local roads). In one year I will also drive 9,100 miles on the highway (14,000 miles x 65% driving on highway). This means that I will use 303 and 1/3rd gallons on the highway (9,100 miles/ 30 mpg highway). On local roads I will drive 245 miles (4,900 miles/ 20 mpg local). I will therefore use 548 gallons of gas in one year. Since I am using regular gas it will cost me $2.399 per gallon. I will therefore spend $1,314.652 for gas in one year (548 gallons x $2.399 per gallon) and in the 5 years that I own the car I will spend $6,573.26 on gas ($1,314.652 x 5 years).
Heat Combustion
Since one gallon of gas is 2644 grams of pure octane the gas that I will be using (88 octane) will contain 2326.72 grams of pure octane (88% x 2644 grams). Since one gallon of my gas contains 2326.71 grams of pure octane it will contain 111,217.216 KJ in it as well (2326.72g x 47.8 KJ/g). As stated above I will use 548 gallons of gas per year. So therefore in one year I will use 60,947,034.37 KJ to run my car (111,217.216 KJ x 548 gallons). In the five years I will have used 304,735,171.9 KJ to run my car. Since most cars are only 25% efficient only 76,183,792.98 KJ of it will be used as kinetic energy. The other 228,551,378.9 KJ will be lost as thermal energy or heat.
Carbon Dioxide Emission
The balanced equation for the combustion of octane is:
2 C8H18 + 25 O2 飪?16 CO2 + 18 H2O + 10898.4 KJ.
I figured out the number of KJ by multiplying the atomic mass of two octane鈥檚 (228 g) by the heat of combustion for octane which is 47.8 KJ/g. The mass of octane was figured out by multiplying the atomic mass of carbon by the number of carbons and doing the same for hydrogen
((12 x 8) + (1 x 18)) x 2.
As previously stated one gallon of 88 octane gas contains 2,326.72 grams of pure octane. In order to make the equation above equal one gallon of gas I must multiply it by the number that will multiply with 228 grams, the number of octane grams in the equation, to equal 2,326.72 or the number of octane grams in a gallon of gas. This number is 10.20491228 (2,326.72 grams/ 228 grams). After I balance the equation to a gallon of gas I have found that there are 163.2785965 moles of CO2 in a gallon of gas. Since I use 548 gallons of gas in one year I will have emitted 89,476.67088 moles of CO2 into the atmosphere in one year (548 gallons x 163.2785965 moles). Therefore in 5 years I will have emitted 447,383.3544 moles of CO2. Since there are 44 grams in one mole of CO2 (12 grams carbon + (2 x 16 grams oxygen)) there will be 19,684,867.59 grams of Carbon Dioxide emitted by my car in 5 years
Cost of Oil
Since I am driving 14,000 miles in one year and will change my oil filter every 3,000 miles I will change my oil 4 times in one year (14,000/3,000=4 %26amp;2/3rd). Since I am using regular oil and the cost of regular oil is $2.99 per quart and my oil tank holds 4.1 quarts it will cost me $12.259 every time that I get an oil change (4.1q x $2.99). Since I have to change my car鈥檚 oil four times in one year it will cost me $49.036 every year for oil ($12.259 x 4 years). Therefore in the five years that I will keep the car it will cost me $245.18 to change my oil ($49.036 x 5 years). I will also have to change my oil filter. Since my oil filter costs $4 and I will be changing it 4 times in a year it will cost me $16 in one year to change my oil filter ($4 x 4 changes). After the five years it will have cost me $80 to change my oil filter. After adding together the price for the oil, $245.18, and the price for oil filters, $80, altogether I will spend $325.18 for maintaining my car鈥檚 oil for 5 years.
Total Cost of Owning This Car
In total I will spend $325.18 for oil, $6573.26 for gas, and the sticker price was $35,440. After adding these costs together the car will have cost me $42,338.44.
Conclusion:
As previously stated I will spend $6,573.26 for gas, $325.18 for oil, and after adding these costs to the sticker price the car will have cost me $42,338.44 in the five years that I will keep it. I will use 304,735,171.9 KJ to run my car in those five years but only 76,183,792.98 KJ will be used as kinetic energy and the other 228,551,378.9 KJ will be lost as heat. I will also emit 19,684,867.59 grams of CO2 into the atmosphere during this period of time. Using the internet I have found that the average American emits 27,215,542 grams of Carbon Dioxide in five years from their car. My car will have emitted about 8 million less grams of CO2 in this amount of time. This means that my car will have a better effect on the environment than will the average American car and that is why I have decided that this will be a smart investment.
May 9, 2007
American Studies Honors
JEFF SHAARA, GODS AND GENERALS
Section I
Scope: The book, Gods and Generals is about the Civil war. It is more specifically about the events that preceded Gettysburg. This book is a prequel to the Michael Shaara鈥檚 book: Killer Angels. The book is split up into chapters and each chapter is told from someone else鈥檚 point of view. The story is told from the eyes of General Lee, Jackson, Hancock, and those of Joshua Chamberlain. The book spans five years, from November 1858 to June 1863. The book covers the lives of these men before had begun and after it had started. It also covers the battles of Antietam, Fredericksburg, and Chancellorsville. The book ends with the Battle of Chancellorsville, Jackson鈥檚 death, and leads right up to the Battle of Gettysburg.
Theme: The theme of the book was that the Civil War was unexpected and was also the bloodiest war in American history.
Description of Sources: It seems to me that Jeff Shaara did not use many primary sources but did however do an extensive amount of research among respected historians and others who were knowledgeable about the Civil War.
Section II
Accuracy: This book, for the most part, is historically accurate. You can tell that Jeff Shaara did his homework. As proved by my own research Mr. Shaara made Gods and Generals as historically accurate as possible. I only found a few examples where my research disagrees with the book and the things he got wrong did not affect the outcome of the book at all. For example: I found that during the battle of Chancellorsville, Hooker left a division with a man named Stoneman to distract the enemy as he and four other divisions tried to surprise the Confederates from the rear. In the book it says that Stoneman waited there as a distraction but did nothing. In the book it only says that Stoneman waited across the Rappahannock River but did nothing. In my research I found out that Stoneman actually stormed the Confederates but did not have great success. This fact does not in anyway change the outcome of the book. The only other examples of inaccuracy in the book have, like this previous example, little effect on the outcome of the book. I have determined from my research and my analysis that Gods and Generals is overall a very historically accurate book.
Logic: There are very few illogical events in the book. The only reason that this book is in the category of Historical-Fiction and not Non-Fiction is because Jeff Shaara speaks for the characters and we do not know if their opinions as presented in this book are true or not. I have come to the belief that most, if not all, of Shaara鈥檚 words from this book are accurate. All of the websites that I have used for my research confirm the opinions and personality of the characters in the book. For example: In the book there is a character named General Couch, who was, like the rest of the characters, an actual General. In the book Couch despises Joe Hooker, who briefly commands the Union Army. In my research I found that Couch actually did despise Hooker in real life, perhaps even more than book describes.
Balance: This book does not make any disturbing or unwarranted presumptions. All of Gods and Generals is based on fact or research done by Jeff Shaara. He does not treat the Confederacy with more respect than is generally given and does not treat the Union Army with any more lack of respect than is generally given. It is well known that the Union Army was not as strong in military tactics as was the Confederacy and this is relayed through the book but the book does not continue the message much more than that. It relays the message that the Union Generals were not as gifted or talented as were the Confederate Generals but this is well known and historically accepted. The book places most of the blame for Union losses upon the shoulders of the Commanding General鈥檚. I have not found any evidence to prove or disprove this with any confidence but I do know that the Union Generals were not very good and I have a strong feeling that Shaara is correct in terms of this subject.
Section III
Value: I thought that Gods and Generals was a very good source of information. I learned many new and interesting things about the Civil War that I did not know and that surprised me. I did not know that the Union had so many Commanding Generals. I was only aware of McClellan and of Grant. If you enjoy learning about history than this definitely is a book for you. It is almost completely historically accurate and it was an interesting read. However, there was one thing about this book that I really did not like. Although there is plenty of fighting in the book it really isn鈥檛 that exciting. I believe that Jeff Shaara wrote this book to better publicize his father鈥檚 book: Killer Angels. I think that I would have enjoyed this book a lot better if I had read Killer Angels either before reading this or after reading it. The book really is not complete without Killer Angels. I also think that my education hindered my ability to enjoy this book, yes you heard me right. Without my knowledge of the Civil War the book would have been much more suspenseful but unfortunately I knew many of the outcomes before they happened.
I don鈥檛 think that you can get a more accurate or insightful view on the Civil War from any other book. Gods and Generals provides a balanced view on the bloodiest war in American History and makes it interesting to the average reader. Even though this book definitely requires that you read Killer Angels I would still recommend it to any history buff as well as any one who read the book Killer Angels. Overall I would say that Gods and Generals was a good book and a good read.
May 9, 2007
American Studies Honors
JEFF SHAARA, GODS AND GENERALS
Section I
Scope: The book, Gods and Generals is about the Civil war. It is more specifically about the events that preceded Gettysburg. This book is a prequel to the Michael Shaara鈥檚 book: Killer Angels. The book is split up into chapters and each chapter is told from someone else鈥檚 point of view. The story is told from the eyes of General Lee, Jackson, Hancock, and those of Joshua Chamberlain. The book spans five years, from November 1858 to June 1863. The book covers the lives of these men before had begun and after it had started. It also covers the battles of Antietam, Fredericksburg, and Chancellorsville. The book ends with the Battle of Chancellorsville, Jackson鈥檚 death, and leads right up to the Battle of Gettysburg.
Theme: The theme of the book was that the Civil War was unexpected and was also the bloodiest war in American history.
Description of Sources: It seems to me that Jeff Shaara did not use many primary sources but did however do an extensive amount of research among respected historians and others who were knowledgeable about the Civil War.
Section II
Accuracy: This book, for the most part, is historically accurate. You can tell that Jeff Shaara did his homework. As proved by my own research Mr. Shaara made Gods and Generals as historically accurate as possible. I only found a few examples where my research disagrees with the book and the things he got wrong did not affect the outcome of the book at all. For example: I found that during the battle of Chancellorsville, Hooker left a division with a man named Stoneman to distract the enemy as he and four other divisions tried to surprise the Confederates from the rear. In the book it says that Stoneman waited there as a distraction but did nothing. In the book it only says that Stoneman waited across the Rappahannock River but did nothing. In my research I found out that Stoneman actually stormed the Confederates but did not have great success. This fact does not in anyway change the outcome of the book. The only other examples of inaccuracy in the book have, like this previous example, little effect on the outcome of the book. I have determined from my research and my analysis that Gods and Generals is overall a very historically accurate book.
Logic: There are very few illogical events in the book. The only reason that this book is in the category of Historical-Fiction and not Non-Fiction is because Jeff Shaara speaks for the characters and we do not know if their opinions as presented in this book are true or not. I have come to the belief that most, if not all, of Shaara鈥檚 words from this book are accurate. All of the websites that I have used for my research confirm the opinions and personality of the characters in the book. For example: In the book there is a character named General Couch, who was, like the rest of the characters, an actual General. In the book Couch despises Joe Hooker, who briefly commands the Union Army. In my research I found that Couch actually did despise Hooker in real life, perhaps even more than book describes.
Balance: This book does not make any disturbing or unwarranted presumptions. All of Gods and Generals is based on fact or research done by Jeff Shaara. He does not treat the Confederacy with more respect than is generally given and does not treat the Union Army with any more lack of respect than is generally given. It is well known that the Union Army was not as strong in military tactics as was the Confederacy and this is relayed through the book but the book does not continue the message much more than that. It relays the message that the Union Generals were not as gifted or talented as were the Confederate Generals but this is well known and historically accepted. The book places most of the blame for Union losses upon the shoulders of the Commanding General鈥檚. I have not found any evidence to prove or disprove this with any confidence but I do know that the Union Generals were not very good and I have a strong feeling that Shaara is correct in terms of this subject.
Section III
Value: I thought that Gods and Generals was a very good source of information. I learned many new and interesting things about the Civil War that I did not know and that surprised me. I did not know that the Union had so many Commanding Generals. I was only aware of McClellan and of Grant. If you enjoy learning about history than this definitely is a book for you. It is almost completely historically accurate and it was an interesting read. However, there was one thing about this book that I really did not like. Although there is plenty of fighting in the book it really isn鈥檛 that exciting. I believe that Jeff Shaara wrote this book to better publicize his father鈥檚 book: Killer Angels. I think that I would have enjoyed this book a lot better if I had read Killer Angels either before reading this or after reading it. The book really is not complete without Killer Angels. I also think that my education hindered my ability to enjoy this book, yes you heard me right. Without my knowledge of the Civil War the book would have been much more suspenseful but unfortunately I knew many of the outcomes before they happened.
I don鈥檛 think that you can get a more accurate or insightful view on the Civil War from any other book. Gods and Generals provides a balanced view on the bloodiest war in American History and makes it interesting to the average reader. Even though this book definitely requires that you read Killer Angels I would still recommend it to any history buff as well as any one who read the book Killer Angels. Overall I would say that Gods and Generals was a good book and a good read.
May 9, 2007
American Studies Honors
JEFF SHAARA, GODS AND GENERALS
Section I
Scope: The book, Gods and Generals is about the Civil war. It is more specifically about the events that preceded Gettysburg. This book is a prequel to the Michael Shaara鈥檚 book: Killer Angels. The book is split up into chapters and each chapter is told from someone else鈥檚 point of view. The story is told from the eyes of General Lee, Jackson, Hancock, and those of Joshua Chamberlain. The book spans five years, from November 1858 to June 1863. The book covers the lives of these men before had begun and after it had started. It also covers the battles of Antietam, Fredericksburg, and Chancellorsville. The book ends with the Battle of Chancellorsville, Jackson鈥檚 death, and leads right up to the Battle of Gettysburg.
Theme: The theme of the book was that the Civil War was unexpected and was also the bloodiest war in American history.
Description of Sources: It seems to me that Jeff Shaara did not use many primary sources but did however do an extensive amount of research among respected historians and others who were knowledgeable about the Civil War.
Section II
Accuracy: This book, for the most part, is historically accurate. You can tell that Jeff Shaara did his homework. As proved by my own research Mr. Shaara made Gods and Generals as historically accurate as possible. I only found a few examples where my research disagrees with the book and the things he got wrong did not affect the outcome of the book at all. For example: I found that during the battle of Chancellorsville, Hooker left a division with a man named Stoneman to distract the enemy as he and four other divisions tried to surprise the Confederates from the rear. In the book it says that Stoneman waited there as a distraction but did nothing. In the book it only says that Stoneman waited across the Rappahannock River but did nothing. In my research I found out that Stoneman actually stormed the Confederates but did not have great success. This fact does not in anyway change the outcome of the book. The only other examples of inaccuracy in the book have, like this previous example, little effect on the outcome of the book. I have determined from my research and my analysis that Gods and Generals is overall a very historically accurate book.
Logic: There are very few illogical events in the book. The only reason that this book is in the category of Historical-Fiction and not Non-Fiction is because Jeff Shaara speaks for the characters and we do not know if their opinions as presented in this book are true or not. I have come to the belief that most, if not all, of Shaara鈥檚 words from this book are accurate. All of the websites that I have used for my research confirm the opinions and personality of the characters in the book. For example: In the book there is a character named General Couch, who was, like the rest of the characters, an actual General. In the book Couch despises Joe Hooker, who briefly commands the Union Army. In my research I found that Couch actually did despise Hooker in real life, perhaps even more than book describes.
Balance: This book does not make any disturbing or unwarranted presumptions. All of Gods and Generals is based on fact or research done by Jeff Shaara. He does not treat the Confederacy with more respect than is generally given and does not treat the Union Army with any more lack of respect than is generally given. It is well known that the Union Army was not as strong in military tactics as was the Confederacy and this is relayed through the book but the book does not continue the message much more than that. It relays the message that the Union Generals were not as gifted or talented as were the Confederate Generals but this is well known and historically accepted. The book places most of the blame for Union losses upon the shoulders of the Commanding General鈥檚. I have not found any evidence to prove or disprove this with any confidence but I do know that the Union Generals were not very good and I have a strong feeling that Shaara is correct in terms of this subject.
Section III
Value: I thought that Gods and Generals was a very good source of information. I learned many new and interesting things about the Civil War that I did not know and that surprised me. I did not know that the Union had so many Commanding Generals. I was only aware of McClellan and of Grant. If you enjoy learning about history than this definitely is a book for you. It is almost completely historically accurate and it was an interesting read. However, there was one thing about this book that I really did not like. Although there is plenty of fighting in the book it really isn鈥檛 that exciting. I believe that Jeff Shaara wrote this book to better publicize his father鈥檚 book: Killer Angels. I think that I would have enjoyed this book a lot better if I had read Killer Angels either before reading this or after reading it. The book really is not complete without Killer Angels. I also think that my education hindered my ability to enjoy this book, yes you heard me right. Without my knowledge of the Civil War the book would have been much more suspenseful but unfortunately I knew many of the outcomes before they happened.
I don鈥檛 think that you can get a more accurate or insightful view on the Civil War from any other book. Gods and Generals provides a balanced view on the bloodiest war in American History and makes it interesting to the average reader. Even though this book definitely requires that you read Killer Angels I would still recommend it to any history buff as well as any one who read the book Killer Angels. Overall I would say that Gods and Generals was a good book and a good read.
Charles Comiskey ruined one of the greatest teams in baseball history and destroyed the careers鈥?of eight ball players. The word that best defines him is 鈥渃heap鈥? Charles Comiskey was without a doubt the cheapest owner in all of baseball. The fact that Comiskey was such a bad owner galvanized the hatred the players had for each other. However the players still won despite the fact that they all despised each other. There were even two players on the team that had not spoken to each other in two years. As previously stated, the players still won despite the fact that they were unhappy. In fact they were so good that they had the best record in the entire American League. Most of the players on the team were very poorly paid which was a result of the cheapness of Charles Comiskey. One of these poorly paid players went by the name of Arnold Gandil but most people referred to him as Chick Gandil. He was the catalyst of the Black Sox scandal of 1919. Chick Gandil slowly convinced his teammates to join in the scandal. The first two to join were Lefty Williams and Ed Cicotte. After the 1919 World Series the owners hired Kenesaw Mountain Landis to help clean up the image of the major leagues. He banned all eight players involved from the Major Leagues for life. All of the players loved the game of baseball although Comiskey was able to drain some of that love from them. Most of them would never get over the fact that they just could not play professional ball again.
The first thing to know about Charles Comiskey is that he was cheap. Charles Comsikey was a former player who ran over his players as if they could not do anything to hurt him. At the beginning of the 1919 season Comiskey promised the players a bonus if and when they won the pennant. When they did win the pennant their 鈥渂onus鈥?was a cheap bottle of champagne (The Blacksox). This was not the only example of the cheapness of Charles Comiskey. The team he owned was named the White Sox however the name got a slight alteration when Comiskey refused to pay for the cost of laundering the player鈥檚 uniforms. After wearing their unwashed uniforms for two weeks straight they nicknamed themselves the Black Sox from all of the dirt that got onto their uniforms (Ward and Burns 133). In the team photograph that can be found on the cover page Joe Jackson鈥檚 (third row far left) pants are almost completely black from all of the abuse they have taken. The best pitcher on the team was named Ed Cicotte. Comiskey promised him a bonus too. He was promised a $10,000 bonus when he won 30 games. When Cicotte won 29 games Comiskey pulled him from the starting rotation just so he would not have to pay him (The Blacksox). Comiskey was so unfair with the players that they started to turn on each other.
There were two cliques on the 1919 team: One was lead by Eddie Collins and the other was lead by Chick Gandil (The Blacksox). Eddie Collins lead the higher paid and more educated group while Gandil lead the lower paid and less educated group. It was Chick Gandil鈥檚 clique that threw the series. In fact Chick Gandil had not talked to Eddie Collins for two years (Ward and Burns 133). Most of the players hated Collins as well and no one threw the ball to him in pre-game warm-ups (Ward and Burns 133). In the team photograph Chick Gandil, standing next to Joe Jackson, and Oscar Felsch, who was seated in the second row third from the left, would not even look at the camera. The team picture also depicts half of the players smiling and the other half glaring or not even looking at the camera. This was not the picture of a happy team that got along with each other. This was a picture of a split team most of whom were unsatisfied with each other and with the ownership that was supposed to be leading them. Eddie Collins was quoted as saying, 鈥淚 thought you couldn鈥檛 win without teamwork until I joined the White Sox.鈥?(Ward and Burns 133) Eddie Collins was right, although the team hated each other and got along so poorly they still won ball games. This was mostly due to the fact that they had such great ball players. The best of who was Joe Jackson.
Joe Jackson鈥檚 swing was modeled by Babe Ruth who many feel was the greatest baseball player of all time. Hall of Famer Ty Cobb said that Jackson was the best hitter he ever saw. Joe Jackson was truly an amazing player. In fact there is a movie almost entirely devoted to Jackson entitled 鈥淔ield of Dreams鈥? Joe Jackson was by far the best player on the team. He only played 12 years in the majors but still has the 3rd highest Batting Average in history (Young). Joe Jackson was near the top of almost every hitting category in 1919 and although Jackson admitted it, some are still skeptical about Jackson鈥檚 involvement in the fix. These people are skeptical because Jackson鈥檚 statistics in the Series are amazing, Jackson hit .375 with 6 RBI鈥檚, and he scored 5 runs. Joe Jackson was not the only good player that played on the 1919 White Sox. Their best pitcher, Eddie Cicotte, had the most wins, complete games, and was 2nd in Earned Run Average in 1919 (Young). The next best player in 1919 was a pitcher who went by the name of Lefty Williams although his real name was Claude. He was 3rd in the league in wins and 8th in Earned Run Average (Young). These players were the backbone of the White Sox however they were not the only contributors
In 1919 Chicago did not play at all like they hated each other. They had the best record in the American League (Young). Although the team was divided they played brilliantly together. The Chicago White Sox were tops in the league in most categories. They had the highest team Batting Average (.287), they had the most hits as a team in the league (1,343), the most runs scored (667), the most stolen bases as a team (150), and they allowed the fewest walks as a team (342) (Young). Eddie Collins called it the best team ever assembled. Most felt that Chicago was a lock the win the World Series. They were 5 to 1 favorites to win the series before it started (Ward and Burns 133). Although they were the best team they were not the best paid.
A surprising fact is that although Joe Jackson was by far the best player on the team he was definitely not the best paid. Eddie Collins was the highest paid player on the team which was another reason why the players despised him. Eddie Collins was paid $15,000 in 1919 while Joe Jackson was only paid $6,000 however Eddie Collins hit only 80 RBI鈥檚 (Runs Batted In) and hit .319 in 1919 while Joe Jackson hit 96 RBI鈥檚 and hit .351 (Young). The reason for this discrepancy was that Eddie Collins was a far better negotiator and also had a college education which was something that most major league players lacked. This statistic shows another example of Charles Comiskey being deceptive and cheap. If Joe Jackson had a college education he would have known that he could have gotten more money from Comiskey however Jackson did not have a college education and Comiskey used this fact against him and many other players by paying them less than they were worth. Another thing that Comiskey used against the players was that in 1919 there was no players association and there was no free agency. What this means is that the players were forced to stay on the same teams unless they were traded. Therefore Comiskey could keep his players for as long as he wanted to without paying them a fair salary and most players did not receive a fair salary from Comiskey. Eddie Cicotte was only paid $6,000 although he had the most wins in the league (Young). The other players who were convicted were also paid poorly. Buck Weaver was paid $6,000, Swede Risberg was paid $3,250, Fred McMullin was paid $2,750, and Lefty Williams was only paid $2,600 (Young). Happy Felsch and Chick Gandil were both paid $4,000 (Young). All of their low salaries were a factor in why they joined the fix.
Many people are under the common misconception that the 1919 World Series was the origin of throwing baseball games but this is far from the truth. In fact attempts were made to throw the 1903 and 1905 World Series but they failed and according to great manager Connie Mack the Philadelphia Athletics threw the 1914 World Series (Ward and Burns 61). The worst involvement in gambling was a player named Hal Chase who made a career out of throwing ball games and three different managers publicly accused him of throwing games (Ward and Burns 133). So obviously the 1919 World Series was not the origin of the art of throwing ball games.
Anyway, the fixing of this World Series was started by White Sox first baseman Arnold 鈥淐hick鈥?Gandil. Gandil was a former club fighter and was on the tail end of his career. This was his last chance to make some real money and he wasn鈥檛 going to let it slip away. Gandil got the whole thing started by talking to his old friend Joseph 鈥淪port鈥?Sullivan. Gandil told Sullivan that he and some players were willing to throw the Series for $100,000 (Ward and Burns 133). Sullivan agreed and so while Sullivan started to work on getting the money Gandil worked on persuading the players to join in the fix. Sullivan got the help of Bill Maharg, Abe Attell, and 鈥淪leepy鈥?Bill Burns but most of the money was provided when Sullivan convinced big time gambler Arnold Rothstein to back them (Ward and Burns 135) (Linder). So while Sullivan spread the idea Gandil got the support of the players, the first two that he persuaded were Eddie Cicotte and Lefty Williams (Ward and Burns 134).
Claude 鈥淟efty鈥?Williams joined the fix because of his low salary. Eddie Cicotte joined because he needed money but also because of the promise Comiskey made him. As stated in the first paragraph Comiskey promised Cicotte $10,000 when he won 30 games but wouldn鈥檛 let Cicotte pitch after he won 29 so that he wouldn鈥檛 have to pay him. After Cicotte and Williams joined the others joined. However not all players were so easily persuaded. Joe Jackson would not accept the $10,000 Gandil offered him and when Gandil upped the offer to $20,000 Jackson said that he would think about it. All in all 7 players joined the fix: Chick Gandil, 鈥淪hoeless鈥?Joe Jackson, Eddie Cicotte, Lefty Williams, Fred McMullin, Charles 鈥淪wede鈥?Risberg, and Oscar 鈥淗appy鈥?Felsch (The Blacksox). Buck Weaver did not participate in throwing the series but he was banned for life because he knew about the fix and failed to tell anyone about it. Halfway through the series the players decided to win because the gamblers were not paying them the full amount of money that they had requested (The Blacksox). When the series was 4-3 in favor of the Reds Arnold Rothstein was skeptical about the outcome of the series so he sent a thug to Lefty Williams hotel room. Lefty Williams was scheduled to pitch the next day and so the thug Rothstein hired told Williams if he did not blow the game then he would hurt William鈥檚 wife (Ward and Burns 140). The series ended 5-3 when Williams gave up 4 runs in the first inning. At the end of the series the players did not get most of the money that they had asked for they had only gotten $60,000 of the $100,000 promised them.
After the Series the players were put on trial for throwing the series but they were all found innocent (The Blacksox). Another very important event happened after the series. The owners decided to change the three person commission that baseball had to a one man commissioner. They considered former presidents, senators, and judges. Their search ended when they named Kenesaw Mountain Landis as the commissioner of baseball (Ward and Burns 143). Landis banned all of the players involved for life in order to restore the public鈥檚 faith in baseball (The Blacksox). Although Joe Jackson and Eddie Cicotte are considered to be two of the best players in the history of baseball, they are to this day not allowed to enter the baseball hall of fame. After banning the players were banned Landis was quoted as saying 鈥淩egardless of the verdict of juries, no player who throws a ballgame, no player that undertakes or promises to throw a ballgame, no player that sits in conference with a bunch of crooked players and gamblers where the ways and means of throwing a game are being discussed and does not promptly tell his club about it, will ever play professional baseball鈥?(Linder). Even after Landis had said this and after banning all of the eight players for life the public was still skeptical about the integrity of major league baseball (Ward and Burns 145).
After they were banned Joe Jackson, Eddie Cicotte, and Swede Risberg played in semi-professional leagues under different names (The Blacksox). Buck Weaver was astonished by Landis鈥?verdict because he himself had not participated in the fix but he had known about it which was why he was banned for life. Weaver tried to get reinstated six times and Landis rejected him all six times. This dedication just goes to show how much the players really loved the game of baseball. These players were not a bunch of mean hearted people, they loved the game of baseball and did not mean for the Series to have such a bad effect on the public. Most of them, apart from Chick Gandil, were ashamed of what they had done to the public. Joe Jackson opened up a bar after his playing days. One day Ty Cobb waltzed into the bar. After Jackson had failed to recognize Cobb he went over to him and said 鈥淒on鈥檛 you recognize me Joe.鈥?To which Jackson replied 鈥淪ure I do Ty鈥?鈥淚 just thought no one wanted to speak to me again, a lot of them don鈥檛.鈥?This is an example of just how ashamed Jackson was of himself.
It is very easy to see just how much influence the bad ownership of Charles Comiskey had on his organization and especially the players. From not doing simple things like laundering the player鈥檚 clothes and lying to them about bonuses that they were to receive he destroyed the team鈥檚 morale and dignity. It is from that tightfistedness that the players turned on him and threw the 1919 World Series. Comiskey turned some of the greatest players of all time, Joe Jackson and Eddie Cicotte, into crooked players. This team should have easily won the World Series; they had the best record in the American League, the highest batting average, most hits, most stolen bases and they were at the top of the league in most statistical categories. Unfortunately because Charles Comiskey was such a bad owner, the team had no other choice but to do something to rebel against him. These player鈥檚 were being run like Comiskey鈥檚 minions, they could not change teams or negotiate for a higher salary, Comiskey could do pretty much whatever he wanted to with them. Charles Comiskey catalyzed the events that led to the downfall of the 1919 White Sox. First he was cheap which is never a good quality for anyone to have. This cheapness led to the player鈥檚 unhappiness which ultimately led to the player鈥檚 decision to throw the World Series. It may not have been the best of decisions but the players felt that they had no other choice and that this was their last option to rid themselves of the oppression of Comiskey. Since the players threw the World Series they were thrown out of baseball. So ultimately it was the cheapness of Charles Comiskey that caused this team鈥檚 demise and the downfall of two of baseball鈥檚 greatest players and 鈥渙ne of the greatest teams of all time.鈥?There have been three movies, and countless websites devoted to this subject and the fact that Charles Comiskey ruined one of the greatest teams in baseball history and destroyed the careers鈥?of eight ball players. Hope that answers your question.
I have straightened hair, but my roots are curly, should i perm my hair or straighten it?
NOOO!!!!! u should never ever do that it damages your hair A LOT!!!! Instead you should put some prouduct (ex. defrizz) on your hair and have your mom or stylist blow the steam from your hair ( itz the prouduct burning not your hair) in the direction of your roots it makes them straighter.
I have straightened hair, but my roots are curly, should i perm my hair or straighten it?
I say just keep your hair naturally curly or consult a professional stylist. My sister tried to straighten her hair by herself--the result was that some of her hair fell out!
I have straightened hair, but my roots are curly, should i perm my hair or straighten it?
perm it
I have straightened hair, but my roots are curly, should i perm my hair or straighten it?
good job
No comments:
Post a Comment