Talk:Walk-off home run

Picture Question

The picture used appears to be reversed. It seems to show the runner coming down the first base line. This is confusing to the viewer.108.28.120.122 (talk) 18:37, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Home Team?

I know nothing about baseball whatsoever, but I don't really see why it would be a requirement for the home team to win for it to be a walk-off? Surely the road team hitting a gamewinner in the bottom of the final inning would also be a walk-off? Koberulz (talk) 07:52, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your question raises an interesting point. Up until some time in the 1950s, it was not a requirement that the home team bat "last" in each inning. They almost always did, but were not required to do so. In the early part of the 20th century, the home team would occasionally choose to bat first (for some reason or other), and in such cases, it would be possible for the visiting team to abruptly end the game with a home run, or indeed any kind of a run. The rare home-first cases have proven difficult for researchers to detect, because the line scores within the box scores would often list the visiting team first anyway. The occasional "x" in the "top" of the ninth was a giveaway, but it wasn't always that easy.

However, according to modern practice, only the home team can pull a "walk-off" by virtue of their batting last.WHPratt (talk) 14:01, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense, then...usually there are coin tosses and such to sort those sorts of things out, unless it's insanely trivial (selection of ends in an indoor sport, say). I'm still not a huge fan of the sentence, though, because it is, in a way, a redundancy (it already mentions it having to occur in the bottom of the final inning), and doesn't take into account situations where there would be no home team (international tournaments, for example). Koberulz (talk) 19:07, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lately, we've seen cases wherein a postponed game has to be made up at the other team's ballpark (to avoid an extra trip), and the displaced team exercises their option to bat last. E.g.: an Oakland at Boston game is rained out, and there is no open date upon which to make it up in the same series. Oakland does not have another visit to Boston this year, so the game is to be made up when the Red Sox play in Oakland later on. Boston can elect to treat the makeup game as a home game for them, which gives them the "last bats," plus a few minor perks. I suppose they can wear the white uniforms if they want to. If they win on a sudden-death home run, you may or may not call this a "visitor walk off." WHPratt (talk) 14:46, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, there have always been cases of a suspended game being resumed and finished in the other team’s ballpark because there were no remaining chances to resume it where it had started. Obviously, in these cases, the visitor-home relationship had to remain the same. E.g., in a suspended game that began in Brooklyn but was finished in Pittsburgh, the Dodgers would still bat last in the resumption, and could thus pull off a "walk off" (though nobody would have called it that) in the Pirates' own park.WHPratt (talk) 13:45, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a recent example:

http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/2013/B07232CIN2013.htm
Says the Retrosheet comment:
"[T]his was the rescheduled game due to a 7/4
postponement in Cincinnati; the Reds wore their home uniforms
and batted last while the Giants wore their road uniforms[.]"
Had Cincy won in the bottom on the ninth, the media would have trotted out the w-word.
WHPratt (talk) 13:24, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Who has the record for most walk-off home runs, career?

Is this a statistic that is tracked? Can anyone find out and post? (Added after David Ortiz's seventh walk-off home run with the Red Sox, June 24, 2006)

I was wondering that myself. A google search turned up this list:

1. Jimmie Foxx, Mickey Mantle, Stan Musial, Frank Robinson, Babe Ruth (12)

6. Tony Perez (11)

7. Dick Allen, Harold Baines, Reggie Jackson, Mike Schmidt, Albert Pujols (10)

Jonpin 05:00, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks! It turns out that the walk-off was his sixth with the Red Sox, but seventh for his career.

I'd been wondering myself, but couldn't find anything in online or print sources. MisfitToys 21:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added Pujols after 6/5/2011 walkoff for the St. Louis Cardinals against the Chicago Cubs.

ibuylowandsellhigh 12:00 6 June 2011 —Preceding undated comment added 17:32, 6 June 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Yesterday, Jim Thome set the record with his 13th career walk-off. This was cited in an on-line article at mlb.com, and listed all of the people with 12 or more (Foxx, Mantle, Musial, Robinson, Ruth). I have no information on the others. I have added this as a new entry at List of Major League Baseball home run records, and included a wikilink to that record on this page. I tried following the linke that Jonpin included, but all it did was take me to a player page on Dick Allen. If anyone can find an alternative source that lists down to 10 walk-offs, please feel free to add this to the appropriate list. 76.29.27.158 (talk) 03:54, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is the term necessary?

I can't stand the term 'walk-off' and I refuse to use it; it sounds incredibly lame. Sports writers should go back to speaking plain English and just say 'game-winning.' {Paul1953H}

I agree it is annoying as hell.

just like 'take it to the house' and 'a buck thirty' as soon as I hear the curling term of take it to the house, or a buck instead of a hundred by an announcer I turn of the voice.

   walk-off is another failed attempt at pretentiousness and makes me want to watch soccer or Cricket instead of baseball.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iowastate (talk • contribs) 01:51, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A hit can be a game-winning one without being a walk-off, so the term makes a useful distinction. Matchups 01:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm with Paul1953H. Game winning home run, generally, used to imply game ending. Or the writer or announcer would simply say, game ending home run. Walk-off contributes minimally to any of the prior renditions of 'game-ending' home run. So I would argue that its value is really not in adding precision to a working definition of the home run, but instead to increase the sensationalism. My counter argument would be to point to Bill Mazeroski's bottom-of-the-ninth homer in the 1960 World Series. Defining this moment as a walk-off versus a game-ending home run adds neither greater definition nor greater sensationalism. It's implied that Mazeroski's home run was improbable, that it won the game and the series, and that it was an intensely dramatic moment. 10stone5 18:16, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One more vote for unnecessary. My very least favorite of the terms is the walk-off walk. They use the term so much nowadays that any value it once had is gone, all it does is annoy the subset of us who hate the term. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.110.11.82 (talk • contribs) 05:53, July 15, 2007

Could we make it policy never to use the term anywhere where "game ending" would suffice? Except, perhaps, in direct quotes and only then with a few other cliches tossed in to demonstrate that the speaker is either (1) a well-trained parrot or (2) someone not to be taken seriously. WHPratt (talk) 12:51, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Sensationalism?" The closest i ever came to enjoying the game at all was among topology-research students in the summer of '66, a building and a half away from Old Main where a Lincoln-Douglas debate had taken place in Galesburg. I made an out on what i suppose was a softball version of a drive to right field, pProbably catching it due to the instinct for self-preservation. But everyone started yelling at me, something about a runner on base, and someone urgently wanting the ball.
--Jerzy•t 05:32, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When did this term start getting used?

While in Japan during the 1993 campaign, the Japanese used the term all of the time. I asked the players how long that they had used the term and all said as long as they could remember. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.229.215.58 (talk) 00:57, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When did this term start getting used? I have been a fan of baseball for a long time, but I don't remember hearing the term until a few years ago. Did someone (on ESPN?) coin the phrase? (Unsigned by Cacophony) at 25:39, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC))

I haven't researched it but my understanding is Dennis Eckersley is given credit for coining the term during his stint as the closer for the Oakland Athletics. While the definition today is generally as described in the article "teams walk off the field" Eckersley's meaning was he threw a pitch and had to "walk off the mound". This is the only story I have ever heard of this origin, if anyone has anymore information I'd like to hear about it so we can update the article. ( Unsigned by :Jobrien at 17:03, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC))

The article has been updated with some usage history, based on an article in today's Boston Globe article: Term Covers All the Bases, Boston Globe/boston.com 062405. Paul August ☎ 16:33, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

I'm 99% sure Rob Neyer from ESPN.com brought it back into common parlance (he didn't invent it, but he brought it back in the late nineties). I definitely remember reading the column on ESPN.com that discussed walk-off homers, and his was about the only one I read regularly before it became part of ESPN Insider (I also read Peter Gammons, but this definitely seems more like Neyer than Gammons). Within weeks of that column, it was being used on Sportscenter and Baseball Tonight and eventually spread.

[Previous part is from an unsigned user, not shanen.] Japanese source? Not sure, but the term 'sayonara <hit>' has been in use in Japan for a long time. I'd say it was already a well-established usage as of 1990. My Japanese reading is not so great, but I wonder if the idea was imported to America? The semantics are the same, though the word essentially means 'bye-bye' and I guess the folksy derivation is that the game goes bye-bye at that point. Perhaps someone who is more fluent in Japanese can consider http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%B5%E3%83%A8%E3%83%8A%E3%83%A9%E3%82%B2%E3%83%BC%E3%83%A0 (which is actually a bit more generic, since this is a term for any game that ends with a walk-off hit). I did notice at least one date of 1952 in the article, and there was also some reference to the English terms. Shanen (talk) 00:51, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd add that it annoys me to no end when announcers or sportswriters call something a walk-off single when there's a play at the plate. 'Walk-off' is supposed to be a very specific term, with one of the conditions being that it's a deadball situation (usually homers, though also walks, balks, etc.).

Dart~Ben

I agree. There has to be something "instant" about it to qualify as "walk off," where the game is clinched and the eventual touching of home by the winning run is reduced to a formality (and hence can be accomplished by walking as well as by running). WHPratt (talk) 14:36, 25 February 2009 (UTC)WHPratt[reply]

For reasons that should be apparent, I am uniquely qualified to answer this question. I first started hearing the term about 10 years ago. -- Mwalcoff 04:38, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good discussion, to which I hope I have done justice in a new last sentence of paragraph 2 of the article. --Spike-from-NH (talk) 18:46, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the article on Grand Slams, we find: "On several occasions in major league history . . . a player has hit a walk-off grand slam for a one-run victory; some baseball observers call this an "ultimate grand slam".[2] Roberto Clemente is the only player to date to have performed this feat as an inside-the-park grand slam, helping the Pittsburgh Pirates defeat the Chicago Cubs 9-8 on July 25, 1956 at Forbes Field."

Whoops! This feat seems to belie the "walk-off" tag, as Clemente probably had to run like hell and then slide hard! WHPratt (talk) 12:38, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One can walk, rather than run, when the ball leaves the field. One cannot take one's time on an inside-the-park home run--nor in most of the other plays to which the article says the term "walk-off" has been applied. Apparently, the walking referred to by the tag is the walking that occurs AFTER your play ends the game. --Spike-from-NH (talk) 19:03, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True. But that reduces "walk off" to a synonym for "game ending." Using a narrower definition contributes something to the language.WHPratt (talk) 15:02, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Reformatted up to the horizontal bar.) By the article and this discussion, I assumed they were synonyms. I agree with your point, but it is an opinion about what the term should mean. --Spike-from-NH (talk) 14:58, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is after the aforementioned Eckersley reference; but May 21, 1997 Keith Lockhart of the Atlanta Braves hit a game-ending (walkoff) home run. Don Sutton, Braves TV Color Commentator, was interviewing Lockhart after the game. Lockhart said that it was his first-ever walk off home run in any league. Sutton, bewildered, asked what he meant by "walk off". Lockhart replied "you hit a home run and everyone walks off the field." The next season the term started showing up everywhere, and shortly thereafter became an unofficial stat. This instance may be coincidence, but considering the huge audience and popularity of the Braves on TBS, I'm guessing this was at least a trigger to its use. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.129.124.227 (talk) 22:47, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greatest Most Famous Walk-Off Home Runs

This is what is listed right now:

Bobby Thompson, ~~1956~~ 1951 Giants
Bill Mazeroski, 1960 Pirates
Chris Chambliss, 1976 Yankees
Kirby Pucket, 1991 Twins
Joe Carter, 1993 Jays

(*Robin Ventura, 1999 NLCS -- turned into a single when he refused to walk it off. WHPratt (talk) 17:59, 17 August 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Aaron Boone, 2003 Yankees
Chris Burke, 2005 Astros

I do not think Puckett and Burke belong on that list. And I'm leaning against Aaron Boone and maybe Chambliss too. In any case, how can this list not include Kirk Gibson in 1988 or Carlton Fisk in 1975? I'd add them, but then the list would be way too long. My proposal is to limit the "Greatest Walk-off Home Runs" paragraph to five examples, them being:

Thompson
Mazeroski
Fisk
Gibson
Carter

Please discuss what an appropriate limit would be for that section, and which examples you would prefer be included within that limit.--DaveOinSF 14:37, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure it's ideal for the article to become a debate about the "greatest"; this isn't a poll. Simply identifying the most notable ones (with reasons) should be sufficient, I think. MisfitToys 20:27, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that if we choose not to remove any of the ones that are currently listed, I am going to add Gibson's and Fisk's homeruns, which are at least as famous as Burke's, Puckett's, Chambliss' or Boone's, which will then bring the total number of examples in that paragraph to nine. I am sure you will agree that nine examples in that paragraph is too much.

I probably should have said "Most Famous" as opposed to "Greatest". As it currently stands, the article states: The subject of the most famous walk-off home run in the history of the major leagues is one that creates a lot of argument and then proceeds to identify the seven famous homeruns listed above. I am simply proposing that that paragraph should be limited to five examples and we should come to consensus as to what those five examples are. I am OK with eliminating that paragraph entirely too.--DaveOinSF 22:13, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to restore Boone's. Its claim to notability is reinforced by references to "Aaron friggin' Boone" in current (2006) radio ads in the Boston area. I also suggest that, along the lines of the vanity rules, fans of a particular team should be circumspect in adding home runs by their favored team to this list. Matchups 21:53, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need to revisit this topic. It's my opinion that wikipedia should not even designate "famous" walk-offs. Too much opinion and not enough encyclopedic value. This article should just list the walk-offs and leave it at that. The info in that section should be merged into the table of "postseason and all star game" walk-offs. X96lee15 16:01, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is more trivia than anything else, but upon reading this:
"In a rare occurrence, only four pitchers in major league history have surrendered two game-ending grand slam home runs in one season, according to the Elias Sports Bureau ... " and one of these is Lindy McDaniel of the Chicago Cubs.
McDaniel himself hit an extra-inning, game-ending homer in a 1963 game:
http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1963/B06060CHN1963.htm
I remember thta Jack Brickhouse was so shocked at calling this that he almost swallowed the microphone! WHPratt (talk) 17:58, 14 October 2013 (UTC) Also, McDaniel had just picked a runner off of second base to get out a jam in the top of the inning -- and it was Willie Mays! WHPratt (talk) 23:43, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Mazeroski looks kinda stiff in the photograph now heading this page. Perhaps the caption should note that it's a statue. (Given the distance marker on the wall, maybe it's actually on the Forbes Field site. WHPratt (talk) 15:29, 5 June 2019 (UTC) Okay, it's in the extended caption if one enlarges the pic. WHPratt (talk) 15:34, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't there be a piece about the original rule?

I believe, and I could be wrong about some of the details, that Babe Ruth had one extra home run which didn't count as such because it was in a walkoff situation where they were down 1 and had two men on in the bottom of the ninth. He hit it over the fence and it only counted as a double because of the rules of the time. DandyDan2007 12:22, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From Appendix B (Decisions of the Special Baseball Records Committee) of the 1996 Macmillan Baseball Encyclopedia: "Before 1920, when the team batting last won the game in the ninth or in an extra inning, the ruling was that the team could not win by more than one run. If a man hit an outside-the-park home run, which, under present rules, would have resulted in a victory by more than one run, he was given credit for a lesser hit and only the winning run counted. The committee originally voted that before 1920 any ball hit outside the park in a sudden death situation should be counted as a home run. However, after the committee had a further opportunity to review their ruling and polled their colleagues on the issue, they reversed their decision on May 5, 1969." 40 players lost home runs as a result, ranging from 1884 to 1918; Ruth's, on July 8, 1918, was the third to last. 14 were reduced to triples, 12 to doubles, and 14 to singles. 31 were in NL games, 5 in AL games, 3 in AA games and 1 in the PL. Jimmy Collins and Sherry Magee each lost two, and 36 players lost one each. 8 each were hit by the Boston Braves and NY Giants, and the Phillies had 5; I suspect short fences at the South End Grounds, Polo Grounds and Baker Bowl had something to do with it, and were partially responsible for the reverse decision. (Ruth's HR, which was ruled a triple, would have been at Fenway Park, where left field was 310 feet and the Green Monster hadn't yet been built.) MisfitToys 20:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I recently boiled this discussion down to a paragraph plus footnote, now at the end of Section 2. --Spike-from-NH (talk) 13:02, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regular season examples -- notability

After seeing this diff, I decided that there should be some guidelines as to what makes a walk-off home run exemplary. Here's what I came up with. Probably it should have at least three to be included:

Caps a comeback from a large deficit
Extra innings
The team was losing at the time of the hit
Teams involved in a pennant race
Game or home run is otherwise notable

Nomar's hit mentioned at the beginning of this note meets the first four criteria. Matchups 12:08, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thomson home run a regular season or playoff home run???

What Bobby Thomson's home run hit in a regular season or playoff game? The only official playoff at the time was the World Series, but his home run was hit during a "playoff" series to determine the pennant. So, it was not a regularly scheduled game, part of the regular season, yet it was not quite a playoff series either. Any thoughts? Editor437 03:22, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe any one-game "playoffs" to determine a playoff berth are considered as part of the regular season. X96lee15 04:01, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, these games (such as the 1978 AL East playoff) count in the regular season, and Thomson's famous HR is included in his 1951 regular season total. MisfitToys 22:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eddie Matthews won a NL HR title due to a homer he added in a playoff series in 1959 (he had been tied with Ernie Banks). Ron Guidry picked up his 25th win in a playoff game. Like it or not, these games are part of the "regular" season, not the "post." WHPratt (talk) 14:32, 25 February 2009 (UTC)WHPratt[reply]

Incomprehensible sentence

From the lead section:

The terms walk-off hit by pitch, the bases loaded base on balls dubbed the "walk-off walk" or walk-off balk have been applied, and the latter has been dubbed a balk-off (these types of questionable walk-offs are seen by some fans as cheapening the concept).

The first part of this sentence is quite incomprehensible to me. It needs rewriting, with quotation marks around the terms that are being mentioned so the reader can tell the difference between them and the active text. Hairy Dude (talk) 23:06, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Cheapening the concept" is still there (now at the end of the second paragraph of Section 1 on terminology) and is still incomprehensible, so I will take a stab at it. --Spike-from-NH (talk) 05:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marlon Byrd's grand slam

I think this should be on here, because I don't think it is any less notable than the other regular-season walk-off homers on this list. --Eastlaw (talk) 03:17, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's certainly less notable than most of them, though the Dunn and Garciaparra entries are somewhat suspect. Most of these had some historic importance apart from simply being dramatic (pennant-clinching, various records, 500th HR, etc.). What's really notable about Byrd's? MisfitToys (talk) 01:01, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chambliss home run

After editing Section 2 to list the baseball rules that govern the walk-off home run--and led to the problematic examples given in that section--I'm going to make the description of the Chris Chambliss home run less florid. I regret deleting the context that the Yankees had not won a pennant in 12 years, but it is irrelevant, as Yankees fans likely would have swarmed onto the field anyway. --Spike-from-NH (talk) 14:02, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After the Chambliss incident, and again after the Robin Ventura incident (where he broke a tie with an apparent grand slam, yet only completed a single), I was sure that MLB would change the rulebook. Why shouldn't it state that "In [describe sudden death situation], a home run hit out of the playing field that would account for the winning runs shall end the game at once," something like that, so that no police escort to home will be required. But they didn't.

In fact, why not make every homer truly automatic? I'd say that it's more dramatic for batter and runners to stop in their tracks and hurry off the stage, rather than require a wimpy token trot around the bases. WHPratt (talk) 13:35, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

W.H., MLB almost never changes the rulebook. "Wimpy token" rituals still have their place in it. A bigger example is the need to actually throw four balls at a batter you don't want to confront. Dropping this requirement is often cited as a way to speed up the game (compensating for newly lengthened commercial breaks). A successful intentional walk, though more certain than a basketball free throw, is not 100% certain, as the catcher must start the play inside the catcher's box but typically ends the play outside the batter's reach. Requiring that runners actually complete the circuit of the bases is not a big problem and, as it is likewise not 100% certain, does sometimes make the game more interesting. The need for a police escort is not so much an attribute of baseball as it is of New York City. --Spike-from-NH (talk) 17:09, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your points. I used to get impatient with the people who grumbled about the intentional walk, given that it's a drop in the bucket as regards time wasting, and it usually occurs during a tense moment and gives the crowd four chances to boo and hiss. Now I'm more realistic. You'd have to witness a thousand intentional walks (that's 4,000 wide pitches) before something interesting happens, and after that the catcher will just cheat a bit more the rest of his career. And, if you wait long enough, someone will miss a base on a home run, which is not exactly a great moment. Life's too short. WHPratt (talk) 20:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What about games with a mercy rule like international competitions?

If the mercy rule is in place, the game will be called after seven innings if one team is ahead by 10 runs. Let us say the home team is leading by nine runs in the bottom of the seventh inning and the batter hits a home run, then the game will end by the mercy rule. Is this considered to be a walk-off home run?

He hits the homer; the umpire (perhaps consulting the scoreboard or scorekeeper) declares the game ended; everyone walks off the field, exactly like the conventional case. I'd say "Yes." --Spike-from-NH (talk) 15:28, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Ultimate Cliché

Quote: "Note that Chris Hoiles' grand slam occurred with the cliché situation: two outs, full count, bottom of the ninth inning, and down by three runs."

My ultimate nit-pick: The "full count" spoils it just a bit, as only one ball was required to keep the comeback alive. I'd say that the same situation but with an 0-2 count would rate higher on the dramatic scale. WHPratt (talk) 15:42, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An 0-2 count would evidence greater batting prowess (as the pitcher can throw three bad pitches but the batter has no margin for error). But I agree that the 3-2 count is "higher on the dramatic scale" and the broadcast color man might say, "There's no tomorrow." (It's not maximum drama; not only might Ball 4 or a number of other outcomes short of a home run keep the game alive, and in some cases be a "walk-off," but the next pitch, or the next ten pitches, could be fouled off for no effect at all on the game situation. Baseball's "drama" often involves letting the fans twist in the wind for a while.) --Spike-from-NH (talk) 17:49, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Better walk off pic for article

could we get Rien Bruans walk off grand slam to send the brew crew to the playoffs as the first pic? His reaction with his hands raised above his head is uesd extensivly in the brewer community. it would look better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wsj608 (talk • contribs) 20:49, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Walk-off triple play

Bruntlett's walk-off play last night was awesome. Nevertheless, the description of it in the second paragraph of Section 1 of the article tugs the paragraph too far. The paragraph is a digression to the other uses of the term "walk-off," increasingly numerous, with an overview of the dissenting opinion that these uses water down the term. "Walk-off triple play" is a notable term, but only because the triple play is notable. At the least, the details should be relegated to a footnote. In contrast, if some cub sports writer coins the term "walk-off ground out" to generate false newsworthiness, I suggest this article not mention it. --Spike-from-NH (talk) 17:18, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

jargon for the sake of jargon

Why not just call the article "game-ending home run"? That's what it's talking about. The article seems more interested in the (very brief) history of the term "walk-off", and obscures whether or not an article on game-enders is really required at all. Why not just merge this into "Home Run" or whatever? 74.65.209.146 (talk) 12:35, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shot heard round the world

Shouldn't the Shot Heard Round the World be included on this page somewhere? It has its own article so it is definitely noteworthy. I think it could be included under other postseason home runs section. AnandJRao (talk) 04:46, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't checked if it was on yet, but it would most likely be listed under the regular season section.

Grand slam single

Yep, this debate again. Should we list it as an honorable mention? 71.192.117.233 (talk) 02:25, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Softball?

Shouldn't the lead mention that this term applies to baseball and softball? I only bring this up because softball is mentioned in the "other leagues" listing (college softball world series). 76.29.27.158 (talk) 03:47, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing, literally, as a Walk-off Home Run

   The whole problem with this saying, as well as others in baseball (such as "hit and run"), is that literally there is no such thing.  If one examines the laws of the game closely, the batter who hits an immediate game ending home run, must cross all bases.  The runner who scores the go ahead run, and all before him, must appropriately touch all bases, including home.  (...)  And if the batter himself is the go ahead run, he must cross all bases, including home.  Therefore, he, and any runner before him, who figures in, and contributes to the go ahead run, must cross all bases: he cannot walk off.  There is no "walk-off"; no such phenomenon, and I so agree with many of the comments on this page against this silly usage.  All players 'walk off' the field after the game is over, anyway, right?  One should simply use the terminology Game Ending (home run, or triple, etc.) in place of Game Winning, to make the distinguishment, not the improper, and somewhat ridiculous, term "Walk-off."  Even in the situation of a Wild Pitch... the player on third that scores the winning run, must touch home plate, not "walk off" into the dugout...  It is was, and should be, intended in reference to the pitcher, who would so walk off in disgust and disappointment.  This is what Dennis E. said and intended.   (John G. Lewis (talk) 04:57, 14 March 2014 (UTC))[reply]

    This term also misses the propriety and sanctity of the game to an extent; the seriousness and particularity of Baseball, historically.  Part of what makes this game so interesting and venerable.  Such as when the catcher does not hold on to the third strike. Although it is recorded, statistically, as a strikeout for the pitcher, it is also a passed ball, and the hitter is allowed to make a run for first base.  He will be safe, unless the catcher throws him out. (...)  Lose language such as "Walk-off" merely needs to be recognized for what it is, being improper, and should be discontinued.  (John G. Lewis (talk) 05:13, 14 March 2014 (UTC))[reply]

"Visitors" score game-ending run

The retrosheet.org site has a table of suspended games at http://www.retrosheet.org/suspend.htm and ten of these are annotated as having been resumed in the other ballpark.

The game of 8/30/1948 began as Brooklyn at Pittsburgh, but was finished in Brooklyn. Pittsburgh scored 6 runs to win 12-11 when Stan Rojek doubled home two runs.
On 7/12/1975, a Minnesota at New York game had to be resumed in Minnesota's park. New York won with two runs in the bottom of the 16th, with Lou Pinella singling home Chris Chambliss for an 8-7 win.
In a game begun with Houston at Washington on 5/5/2009, Washington eventually won 11-10 when the game was finished in Houston, on an 11th inning error by Miguel Tejada.

Thus are documented three instances of game-ending (I refuse to employ the "w" word here) hits (or other plays) by "Visiting" players, though no home runs. WHPratt (talk) 03:35, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested moves

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. The consensus is that the proposed title is ambiguous and that the current title accurately covers the scope. Jenks24 (talk) 14:37, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Walk-off home run → Walk-off – This article can easily describe any kind of "walk-off" situation, not just home runs. They can include base hits, bases on balls, wild pitches, stolen bases... virtually any play in which runners can advance bases can occur as a "walk-off". <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 23:01, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, the term relates to just home runs, a standard term in baseball. Randy Kryn 11:43, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- The term is not restricted to home runs; for example: New Met Uribe hits walk-off single in 10th Mind matrix 19:04, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment a "walk off" appears to be a form of labour action also [1] -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 05:03, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose move to proposed name, but as you state this article should either be renamed to something more generic (eg - walk-off (baseball) or walk-off win), or such an article should be created. Mind matrix 18:33, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I've changed the intended target to a disambiguation page. Mind matrix 18:44, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: note also that by using a generic name per my previous comment would result in more incoming links, as there are quite a few pages using the baseball term "walk off" in a sense other than "home run"; see this Wikipedia search, for example. Mind matrix 19:04, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - It doesn't make any sense to move "walk off home run" to a disambiguation page, when there is no ambiguity about the term "walk off home run." Rlendog (talk) 13:37, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 28 September 2015

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus. There is no consensus to move this page at this time. bd2412 T 18:29, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Walk-off home run → Walk-off win – I agree that the term "walk-off" may be ambiguous, but the article may describe any form of win achieved by a walk-off. Although home runs are a particular form of walk-off wins, they account for a relatively small proportion of wins achieved via the walk-off fashion. As I said above, singles, doubles, triples, bases on balls, hits by pitches, sacrifice flies or bunts, stolen bases... these plays are all means of advancing bases, and can all occur in a walk-off situation. But in any case, the team which makes the walk-off play wins, hence the more generic, yet unambiguous title. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 14:04, 28 September 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. Natg 19 (talk) 05:21, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Unnecessary. And it is not just a "win" resulting from a "walk off" item, the other team loses. Wwlk off win is not a particularly common term, and walk off home run is still the primary subject. Rlendog (talk) 12:19, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ I don't really think you should redirect the more general term to the more specific term, it should be the other way around. So the move should probably be made. -DJSasso (talk) 16:35, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Djsasso: That could be addressed by reversing the recent changes that redirected Walk-off win to Walk-off home run. It doesn't necessarily require that Walk-off home run be moved as in the proposal.—Bagumba (talk) 19:00, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Good catch I didn't notice that. I have thus reverted it and no longer have an opinion one way or the other. -DJSasso (talk) 19:26, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If the article is renamed, will you make the appropriate adjustments to the current sections in this article so their scope is limited to walk-off home runs, and adjust the lead and other sections to emphasize the general concept of walk-off wins? isaacl (talk) 16:40, 16 October 2015 (UTC) Yes— Preceding unsigned comment added by Some Gadget Geek (talk • contribs) 18:32, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It seems that 90% of Walk-off home run currently deals specifically with walk-offs from home runs, and not the more generic topic of walk-off wins. I would suggest first boldly editing walk-off win to deal with the more generic subject. If it is demonstrated that it is worthy of being a standalone article, a merger with the HR article can then be proposed, if necssary.—Bagumba (talk) 19:00, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
All walk-off home runs result in walk-off wins. However, not all walk-off wins come from home runs. I think it's nice if we keep them separate. Canuck^{89 (chat with me)} 02:11, October 17, 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Baseball assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Walk-off home run/Comments (baseball), and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

*Needs more references.

Last edited at 00:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 14:26, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Why does the most recent game-ending grand slam always become encyclopedic?

Okay, this new entry doesn't meet the standard, but let's celebrate anyway. Right.

It happened with one out (hence, no "ultimate," whatever the score). I'll credit the batter with trying to hit a fly ball (but as the announcer noted, he just had to hit it out of the infield to win the game). Then again, a single or even a walk would have been just as good. (Any batter trying to hit a grand slam with two outs should probably be fined rather than listed here.)

Big deal! WHPratt (talk) 03:21, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: My mistake! As we're talking about 29 "ultimate" G.S., and thus G.S. only, the baserunner factor doesn't enter into it. However, the inning certainly does. The SABR Home Run Encyclopedia says that for the years 1876-1995, 4,382 grand slam home runs were struck, with 481, about 11%, in the ninth inning or later. Assuming that about half are by the visiting team, then there were approximately 240 grand slams in the home half of said innings, almost all of which probably ended their game. So you'd expect about two such homers per season on average, more in HR-rich eras. It's not something you see every day, but still a long list. WHPratt (talk) 10:57, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's included because editors routinely update it. I don't see a good reason to have it, but as long as it's un-eventful I see no reason to not have it. power~enwiki (π, ν) 16:33, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, fair enough! WHPratt (talk) 20:23, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Check the edit history. Back on 10 Oct 2011, someone ended a playoff game with a tie-breaking grand slam, and I knew it would find its way over here. ~~This~~ A later editor was thoughtful enough to redefine "ultimate" to include it and many others. We got yet another new one yesterday. We need constant vigilance as everybody's favorite player's latest homer tries to sneak in! WHPratt (talk) 12:29, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If the ESPN account is correct, last night's game-ending grand slam was off a 2-2 pitch and hence isn't "ultimate" by the given definition (which, for some reason, includes "full count"). Good luck correcting it and making it stand! WHPratt (talk) 13:14, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was wrong here. It happens. The definition of "ultimate grand slam" is for any game-ending homer that erases a 3-run deficit. The deal about two out and a full count was deemed a "cliche situation" when it was brought up, and that has supposedly only happened once or twice. Indeed, the recent event -- 2 and 2 with 2 out -- is about as desperate as one can get, except for 0-and-2. I promise to keep quiet about this in the future. (However, see if the next game-ending grand slam doesn't find its way here, regardless of the final score.) WHPratt (talk) 14:45, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And, once again, the latest game-ending grand-slam homer is mistakenly credited as an "ultimate," rendering that particular definition meaningless. WHPratt (talk) 15:39, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an idea: as this article deals with game-ending home runs and further embellishment isn't required, why not leave the discussion of "ultimate grand-slam" entirely to the Grand slam (baseball) article? Take the word "ultimate" out of here and let anybody who witnesses a game-ending grand slam update the entry, which would then be correct. WHPratt (talk) 16:56, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated rule numbers

The rule numbers cited in the Relevent rules section ceased to be correct in 2015. That year, the rules were reorganized. Here are the current rules. Please update the cited numbers to reflect their current locations in the rulebook. SMP0328. (talk) 04:32, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]