Talk:No-hitter

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Baseball Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BaseballWikipedia:WikiProject BaseballTemplate:WikiProject BaseballBaseball articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

The Wikipedia page for players hitting for the cycle has the list of all the players who accomplished the feat and when they did it. That would be a nice addition to this page. Hsox05 14:39, 14 May 2007 (UTC) ==why dont you make a list of the teams who have the most no-hitters and perfect games? -N0N0 5/16/2012[reply]

The AP article is saying that the gap between today's Sanchez no-hitter and the last no-hitter, Randy Johnson's in 2004, is the longest ever. That is not the case. Baseball went a full three years, 1931-34, without a no-hitter.Vidor 06:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe they are only counting "no-hitters" and not perfect games. The last game that was only a no-hitter was on 06/11/03. Either way, I think the article is now correct. -- dakern74 (talk) 02:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, looked at the article again, and it is talking about most GAMES between no-hitters, not days. They went three years 1931-34, that's true, but that was when MLB had only sixteen teams and thus only eight games a day. Now they have thirty teams, and thus fifteen games a day. Is that the better measure? Vidor 06:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't notice who had the earliest no-hitter. So who was it? And whose record did he beat? Thomas Magnum 16:46, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The first no-hitter listed in the MLB record book was by George Bradley on 07/15/1876. The distance between the pitcher's mound and home plate changed several times back then; the first one with the current 60½-foot dimensions was by Bill Hawke on 08/16/1893. Hope this helps. -- dakern74 (talk) 04:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the following sentence:

Furthermore, he pitched that seventh no-hitter on the same day Rickey Henderson stole his 939th career base, passing Lou Brock for the all-time record.

This tidbit didn't seem to have anything to do with no-hitters or with Nolan Ryan, especially not following the word "Furthermore". Ufwuct 20:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree (and I'm the one who added it) because I thought it was too great of a concidence not to include.

I undid the piped link insterted by User:MrHaroldG2000 so that it leads to the Expos, not the Nationals; we're talking about 1969, and the whole emphasis of that line is about how the Expos were a new franchise. Makes more sense this way.

Intro section should mention the frequency of no hitters, and also distinguish between a single pitcher and multiple pitchers pitching a no hitter. Tempshill 14:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"The achievement of a no-hitter is rare and considered to be an extraordinary accomplishment for a pitcher or pitching staff. In most cases in the professional game, no-hitters are accomplished by a single pitcher who throws a complete game"

...? Demong 22:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Buehrle.throws no hitter on April 18th 2007 it's the first White Sox no-hitter since '91

I put this in this morning, then it was taken out by someone. I wanted to add it back in but don't want to start an "edit war".

While there are plenty of "almosts", I would think this was unusual both in that it was his second ever major league start (like Wilson Alvarez) and that he was still on the no-hitter 3/4 into the game when he got injured and removed from the game. I think of an "almost" that wouldn't go in this as something like "giving up a hit with 2 outs in the ninth" (as I think happened with Tom Seaver for the Mets in the late 1960s), but I can't think of any instance when a pitcher injured himself this late in a game while still on a no-hitter, especially one like this which if completed would've been "historic". If we are including rain-shortened no-hitters and the Ernie Shore "perfect game" I would think this would be an unusually noteworthy exception.

Any thoughts? If anyone has other examples of someone still on a no-hitter in the 7th inning or beyond being taken out for injury happened then I agree leave it out but I think this was unique. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.179.96.86 (talk) 20:59, 2 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Hi there! I was the one who removed it. Thanks for the post.

Wilson Alvarez is not a valid comparison, given that he completed his no-hitter. Ernie Shore's game was also a complete (combined) no-hitter, and "perfect game" is only mentioned in the context that the designation was retracted. "Rain-shortened no-hitters" are similarly only mentioned as not counting anymore. Indeed, the word "almost" appears nowhere in the article. In the face of contention, the burden is on the adding editor to illustrate (by reference) that Philip Hughes's "almost" is notable enough to be mentioned when no others are. — Demong _talk 21:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There have been countless "near no hitters". The only ones really worth mentioning here are in the post-season or really special circumstances, like the Haddix game, or the Toney-Vaughn game, or Ewell Blackwell missing a second consecutive no-hitter. Most are not. Consider the one where some San Diego pitcher was throwing a no-hitter but the game was either scoreless or he was trailing by a run, and manager Preston Gomez put in a pinch-hitter for him in the eighth inning as the crowd booed loudly. The other team got at least one hit off the reliever, and won the game, as I recall. That's a bizarre one, but not worth bringing up in the article. Wahkeenah 23:19, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then there's the one where a Pirates pitcher, I think it was, gave a leadoff single and shut them down the rest of the way. That's fairly unique, and doesn't really belong here either. A separate article about near-no-hitters could be written, but it would be very long. Wahkeenah 23:44, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK I'm convinced, thanks for the "education". The Philip Hughes article mentions it anyway (not by me), which is where it should go.216.179.96.86 (talk) 13:59, 3 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Mike Scott of the Houston Astros threw a no-hitter against the San Francisco Giants on September 25, 1986; the victory also clinched the National League West title for the Astros, the only such coincidence thus far. In the first game of a double header on September 28, 1951, Allie Reynolds of the New York Yankees pitched a no-hitter against the Boston Red Sox which clinched a tie for the American League pennant (the pennant was clinched outright in the double header's second game).

In June 1938, Johnny Vander Meer of the Cincinnati Reds accomplished what no other pitcher has managed to duplicate before or since. On June 11 of that year, he threw a no-hitter against the Boston Braves. In his very next start, June 15, he threw a no-hitter against the Brooklyn Dodgers, thus becoming the only pitcher in baseball history to throw consecutive no-hitters. He was perhaps aided by the fact that it was also the very first night game at Ebbets Field. Most baseball historians believe that his feat will never be exceeded, since to do so a pitcher would have to throw three consecutive no-hitters. Allie Reynolds (in 1951), Virgil Trucks (in 1952), Jim Maloney (in 1965), Nolan Ryan (in 1973) and Roy Halladay (in 2010) are the only other major leaguers thus far to throw two no-hitters in the same season. The pitcher who came closest to matching Vander Meer was Ewell Blackwell of Cincinnati, who had a no-hitter broken up with one out in the ninth against Brooklyn on 22 June 1947, four days after no-hitting the Braves 6-0.

Dave Stieb of the Toronto Blue Jays nearly duplicated Vander Meer's feat in his last two starts of the 1988 season when he lost no-hit bids with two outs in the ninth on both occasions. Furthermore, Stieb threw a one-hitter in his second start of the following season, thus giving him three one-hitters in four starts. After losing another no-hit bid with two outs in the ninth inning (this one a perfect game) later in 1989, Stieb finally accomplished the elusive feat when he no-hit the Cleveland Indians on September 2, 1990.

Five pitchers have thrown a no-hitter in both the American League and the National League: Cy Young, Nolan Ryan, Jim Bunning, Hideo Nomo, and Randy Johnson. Only three catchers have caught a no-hitter in each league: Gus Triandos, Jeff Torborg, and Ron Hassey. Triandos caught Hoyt Wilhelm's 1958 no-hitter and Jim Bunning's perfect game, Torborg caught Sandy Koufax's perfect game and Nolan Ryan's first no-hitter, and Hassey caught Len Barker's and Dennis Martinez's perfect games.

Harvey Kuenn had the dubious distinction of making the final out in two of Sandy Koufax's four no-hitters. As a Giant in 1963 he hit a ground ball back to none other than Koufax for the final out; as a Cub in 1965 he struck out for the final out in Koufax's perfect game.

In 1991, Nolan Ryan completed his seventh no-hitter by striking out Roberto Alomar for the final out. Ryan's second baseman in his first two no-hitters (both of which were pitched in 1973) had been Alomar's father, Sandy Sr. Sandy Alomar Sr. had also been involved in the final outs of Clyde Wright's 1970 no-hitter, converting a double play on Felipe Alou's ground ball. Like Alomar, Alou and Wright also had sons who would play in the Majors (Alomar is also the father of Sandy Jr., Wright is the father of Jaret, and Alou is the father of Moisés). Sandy Alomar Jr., Jaret Wright and Moisés Alou would all compete in the 1997 World Series: Alomar as Wright's catcher on the Cleveland Indians, and Alou as an outfielder for the victorious Florida Marlins.

The Forsch brothers are the only brother combination to pitch Major League no-hitters. Bob of the St. Louis Cardinals pitched two: on April 16, 1978 against the Philadelphia Phillies, and September 26, 1983 against the Montréal Expos. Less than a year after Bob's first, his brother Ken of the Houston Astros joined him by pitching his no-hitter on April 7, 1979 against the Atlanta Braves.

Back-to-back no-hitters have been tossed for teams opposing each other during a single series. On September 17, 1968, Gaylord Perry of the San Francisco Giants no-hit the St. Louis Cardinals, 1-0, at Candlestick Park. The very next day, Ray Washburn returned the favor for his Cardinals against the Giants, with St. Louis prevailing over San Francisco, 2-0. (Curt Flood was involved in the final out of both no-hitters, striking out for the final out in the former and catching Willie McCovey's fly ball for the final out in the latter. Coincidentally, all four players were born in 1938, as were Johnny Edwards, who caught Washburn's no-hitter, and Harry Wendelstedt, a member of the umpiring crew for both no-hitters and the home plate umpire for Perry's.) It happened again when Jim Maloney of the Reds no-hit the Astros 10-0 on April 30, 1969 at Crosley Field. The very next day, Don Wilson of the Astros returned the favor, no-hitting the Reds 4-0. The no-hitters were the second of both Maloney's and Wilson's careers; in 1965 Maloney, in a third game, allowed no hits after ten innings but had the no-hitter broken up by a home run in the 11th.

Like Don Wilson, Ken Holtzman also pitched two no-hitters—and both his and Wilson's were against the same two teams. Their first no-hitters were in a home game against the Atlanta Braves: Wilson's at the Astrodome on June 18, 1967, and Holtzman's at Wrigley Field on August 19, 1969. Coincidentally, both no-hitters ended with Hank Aaron making the final out and with Phil Niekro (himself a future no-hit pitcher, on August 5, 1973) being the losing pitcher. The second no-hitters for both Wilson and Holtzman were in a road game against the Cincinnati Reds: Wilson's aforementioned second no-hitter was the last one in the history of Crosley Field, and Holtzman's was on June 3, 1971 and was the first in the history of Riverfront Stadium.

Addie Joss of Cleveland Naps and Tim Lincecum of the San Francisco Giants are the only pitchers to throw two no-hitters against the same team. On October 2, 1908, Joss hurled a perfect game against the Chicago White Sox. (This no-hitter is the latest, calendar-wise, to have been pitched in a regular season game in modern history, later tied by Bill Stoneman, in 1972.) Joss no-hit the White Sox a second time on April 20, 1910. Lincecum, meanwhile, no-hit the San Diego Padres in back-to-back seasons: on July 13, 2013, and June 25, 2014.

In 1970, four of the five California-based Major League Stadiums had no-hitters pitched in them, with Candlestick Park being the only one not to witness a no-hitter. In the first game of a June 12 doubleheader, Pittsburgh Pirate pitcher Dock Ellis no-hit the San Diego Padres 2-0 at San Diego Stadium (while, Ellis would claim, under the influence of LSD). On July 3, California Angel pitcher Clyde Wright no-hit the Oakland Athletics 4-0 at Anaheim Stadium. On July 20, Los Angeles Dodger pitcher Bill Singer no-hit the Philadelphia Phillies 5-0 at Dodger Stadium. And on September 21, Oakland's Vida Blue no-hit the Minnesota Twins 6-0 at Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum.

In addition to the aforementioned Wilson Alvarez, whose only previous Major League appearance came as a Texas Ranger, two other pitchers have pitched no-hitters in their first starts with a new team. On May 15, 1960, only two days after being traded from the Philadelphia Phillies to the Chicago Cubs, Don Cardwell no-hit the St. Louis Cardinals 4-0 in the second game of a doubleheader. On April 4, 2001, Hideo Nomo, signed as a free agent by the Boston Red Sox the previous December, no-hit the Baltimore Orioles 3-0. Nomo's no-hitter - the second of his career - is also the earliest in the regular-season calendar that a no-hitter has been thrown.

Four pitchers have homered while pitching no-hitters. Wes Ferrell of the Cleveland Indians hit a home run during his April 29, 1931 no-hitter against the St. Louis Browns. Jim Tobin of the Boston Braves hit a home run during his April 27, 1944 no-hitter against the Brooklyn Dodgers. Earl Wilson of the Boston Red Sox hit a home run during his June 26, 1962 no-hitter against the Los Angeles Angels. Rick Wise went one better: in his June 23, 1971 no-hitter against the Cincinnati Reds, the Philadelphia Phillies pitcher hit two home runs.

Roy Halladay, who pitched a 1-0 perfect game for the Philadelphia Phillies against the Florida Marlins on May 29, 2010 and a second no-hitter against the Cincinnati Reds in the same year's NLDS (4-0 on October 6), has the distinction of being born on the same day a no-hitter was pitched. He was born May 14, 1977—the same day Kansas City Royal Jim Colborn no-hit the Texas Rangers.

Some teams seem to pitch no-hitters more than others. Most notably, until Johan Santana no-hit the St. Louis Cardinals on June 1, 2012, the New York Mets had never had a no-hitter pitched for them since their inception in 1962, despite having had some of baseball's most overpowering no-hit pitchers including Tom Seaver, Dwight Gooden, Nolan Ryan, Pedro Martínez, Tom Glavine, Al Leiter and Mike Scott on their pitching staff at times. (In sharp contrast, Bill Stoneman pitched a no-hitter for the Montreal Expos on April 17, 1969—only nine games into the franchise's existence. Moreover, Sandy Koufax no-hit the Mets on June 30, 1962, only three months into the Mets' existence, for the first of his four career no-hitters.) The San Diego Padres, who started play in 1969, are the only team, as of 2014, to have never had a pitcher hurl a no-hitter for them.

Bobo Holloman's no-hitter was one of his only three Major League victories. By comparison, nine 300-game winners—Grover Cleveland Alexander, Kid Nichols, Lefty Grove, Early Wynn, Steve Carlton, Don Sutton, Greg Maddux, Roger Clemens and Tom Glavine—have/had never pitched a no-hitter in their careers.

Also, some parks are famous for their number of no-hitters, either high or low. Forbes Field, home to the Pittsburgh Pirates from 1909 to 1970, never saw a no-hitter. Conversely, Kauffman Stadium, home of the Kansas City Royals, had a no-hitter pitched in only its first year of existence: Nolan Ryan's first career no-hitter in 1973. Two parks in existence for a decade or more have only seen one no-hitter to date—the Orioles' current home, Oriole Park at Camden Yards, and Coors Field, the notoriously hitter-friendly home of the Colorado Rockies. In both parks, the only pitcher to throw a no-hitter is Hideo Nomo.

No-hitters have become rarer than ever. Anibal Sanchez's no-hitter on September 6, 2006 ended a 2 1/2 year stretch without one, the longest stretch between no-hitters in seventy years [1] and the longest number of games played (6,364) between no-hitters in Major League history.[2] The number of no-hitters pitched since the early 1990s has decreased due to the increasing rarity of a starting pitcher completing a game, based on restrictions to his pitch count (which nowadays averages about 100 per quality start). Since 100 pitches are usually thrown by the sixth or seventh inning of most games, the starting pitcher is typically removed from the game, even if he is pitching well. There have, however, been a number of combined no-hitters, utilizing multiple pitchers. Generally however, managers will allow the pitcher working on a no-hitter to stay in the game because even some of the greatest pitchers in history have never had a chance at a no-hitter.

In the 2006 World Baseball Classic Shairon Martis pitched a no hitter for the Netherlands against Panama national baseball team, however it was only seven innings due to the mercy rule.

Wasn't there a black pitcher who admitted (in a biography or something similar) that he was high on cocaine and didn't realize what he'd done until a teammate rushed over and told him that he'd just pitched a no-hitter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.70.186 (talk) 23:44, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doc Ellis claims to have been high on LSD when he threw his no-hitter, but I'm not sure that's actually notable — Demong _talk 00:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did some cleanup that included linking to some official MLB info that includes the definition of a no-hitter as well as links to a couple of box scores. Removed some redundancies and took out the paragraph about the "controversial" no-hitter rule that excluded games of less than nine innings; the reader can judge if Andy Hawkins deserves credit for a no-hitter or not. (I say no, as he should not when all the pitchers who lost a no-hitter in the ninth inning don't). Vidor 15:59, 12 May 2007 (UTC) The article is in error with regard to the definition of a no-hitter. MLB changed the definition to adhere to the original definition, which the article does note, as a "no-no", a no-hit, no-run game. Before the change, if a pitcher or pitchers pitched at least nine innings without giving up a hit but did give up at least one run, it was considered a no-hitter; the change in definition eliminated those games from the list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C0:5201:61FC:F8D2:89CA:4B1E:2A7B (talk) 03:17, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with most of your changes, but why remove the citation for the "sportscasters" sentence? That paragraph went through a lot of anecdotal back-and-forth, and was refined into two sentences, both meaningful / relevant / cited. Leaving the sentence uncited may invite more "ESPN jinxes games all the time lol" type additions... — Demong _talk 18:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The MLB footnote reference says, "An official no-hit game occurs when a pitcher (or pitchers) allows no hits during the entire course of a game, which consists of at least nine innings." It does not say that a pitcher on a losing team on the road cannot be credited with a no-hitter even though he only pitches 8 innings. Consider this: If a pitcher pitches a complete game and loses, a newspaper article might say, "Smith pitched very well in the loss, throwing a complete game 3-hitter." What if Smith allowed no hits? What would the newspaper article say? HolyT 17:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What would the newspaper say? "Smith pitched eight no-hit innings, but does not officially receive credit for a no-hitter due to MLB's rule." The MLB footnote does in fact say that a losing pitcher on the road does not get credit for a no-hitter, because it says nine innings are required, and eight innings is not nine. Andy Hawkins, Silver King back in 1890, and other pitchers (have there been other pitchers?) do not get credit. Vidor 05:16, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vidor, you may well be correct, and I suspect that you are, but I just checked the reference again, and I don't see what you are referring to that specifically says that a road losing pitcher in a nine-inning game doesn't get credit for a no-hitter. The reference merely says that the GAME must consist of nine innings. A home win which is eight and a half innings DOES "consist... of at least nine innings" and so there's no reason why the losing road pitcher shouldn't get credit for a no-hitter according to that phrasing. Does anyone have an explicit reference? If indeed you are correct, Vidor, then perhaps the newspaper article should read, "Smith pitched a complete game zero-hitter, but he did not pitch a complete game no-hitter." HolyT 16:07, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A road losing pitcher would by definition not pitch nine innings because the home team would not bat in the bottom of the ninth. He would only pitch eight, thus, no no-hitter. Eight and a half is less than nine. Hawkins and King do not get credit. See the list at Retrosheet and the MLB.com list (MLB.com would not list King in any case because they do not list no-hitters from defunct leagues). Vidor 03:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strange rule. By definition, a visiting losing pitcher cannot pitch a no-hitter, even though he pitches what the statistics will call a complete game and he gave up no hits. 68.196.1.236 (talk) 02:25, 13 August 2020 (UTC)captcrisis[reply]

The article says the only no-hitter pitched on the last day of the season was Mike Witt's perfect game in 1984. What about the 4-man combined no-hitter pitched by the A's on the last day of the 1975 season? FHSerkland 17:23, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looked it up, and you're right. Added. — Demong _talk 20:39, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While lots of sources will say that Stewart and Valenzuela's games in 1990 were the only time two no-hitters were thrown on the same day, actually two no-hitters were thrown on the same day in 1898. I would guess that this is b/c some sources confine themselves to the modern era. I changed the article to reflect the 1898 no-nos on the same day. Vidor 00:32, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a name for a perfect game in which all outs are strikeouts? It looks like the record for strikeouts in a full game is 20, so this has never happened, but it seems like it would be the real pinnacle of pitching achievement. dclayh 20:44, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, because it's never happened. — Demong _talk 23:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Name is "Perfect Strikeout Game". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.197.66.249 (talk) 15:55, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or, it could be "Who are these chumps masquerading as a baseball team?" Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 16:05, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How is that the "real pinnacle of pitching achievement"? I would say the real pinnacle is a perfect game where only one pitch is needed to get out each hitter. Of course, there's no name for it either since it's even more unlikely to happen. --Horoball 00:15, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, 27 pitches, 27 ground outs and fly outs, distributing the work, and the glory. "Strikeouts are fascist, ground balls are democratic." -- Kevin Costner in Bull Durham. However, there's more to it than that joke. Is a no-hitter a team effort, or is it just the pitcher-and-catcher? Well, unless he strikes out all 27, it's at least in part a team effort. Don Larsen's perfect game was saved by a terrific running catch by Mickey Mantle. Bobo Holloman's no-hitter was saved by terrific defense all around, as he was not really much of a pitcher. In a way, 27 strikeouts would be "easier", as it would never test anyone in the field (except the catcher). 27 strikeouts would be the ultimate "battery" achievement. 27 pitches and 27 outs would be the ultimate "team" achievement. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:27, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Larsen's perfect game was also saved by a Jackie Robinson line drive that caromed off third baseman Andy Carey's glove to shortstop Gil McDougald, who threw Robinson out by less than a step.MrHaroldG2000 (talk) 23:22, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's true. That was on Larsen's second pitch in the top of the 2nd inning. Nobody knew then that a perfect game was in progress. And just another illustration of the old adage, "baseball is a game of inches." Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:53, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could also state a strong case that Dallas Braden got help in his perfect game from Kevin Kouzmanoff's 8th-inning catch of a Carlos Peña pop-up in foul territory, in front of the Oakland dugout. With Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum having such spacious foul territory, Peña would have gotten a second chance in any other stadium. MrHaroldG2000 (talk) 06:16, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think a minor-leaguer once did that and went on to a brief and undistinguished career in the majors. (All these baseball articles would be enhanced by including the minors.)Dynzmoar (talk) 13:26, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and no. Minor league accomplishments can tend to be more "extreme" due to the unevenness of the talent relative to the majors. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:42, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Listen, I think his no-hitter is awesome, too. But some overzealous Red Sox fans are putting in too much detail about that one game. This is an article devoted to no-hitters going back for 130 years, over two hundred of them. There should not be a whole paragraph about one game. There are other places that info can go, like 2007 Boston Red Sox season or Clay Buchholz. Vidor 05:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone with any knowledge of it post it in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.226.239.87 (talk) 15:59, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...is parent-to-baby talk, like "boo-boo" and such stuff as that. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No it isn't. You made that connection. It doesn't otherwise exist. — Demong _talk 00:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"No-no" is a long-standing baby-talk expression. Where's the evidence that it was independently invented for "no-hit no-run"? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"No-no" may mean other things, just like a lot of words and phrases have multiple meanings, but in baseball "no-no" is shorthand for "no hits no runs", not babytalk. — Demong _talk 00:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where's the evidence for that assertion? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I can't find a reliable source that says "no-no means 'no hits no runs'", but that's relatively common knowledge, isn't it? I haven't ever heard anyone suggest that "no-no" is babytalk, yet a quick google will give you thousands of examples of official baseball people (MLB.com also) using the term frequently and interchangeably with "no-hitter"... how about you give evidence for the babytalk assertion, which is vastly less obvious? — Demong _talk 00:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"No-no", as in "That's a no-no", as in "That's something you're not supposed to do, junior", was around long before "no-no" for no-hitter, which cropped up in more recent years, probably from the fertile imaginations of the ESPN writers. It's not listed in my copy of the Dickson Baseball Dictionary published in 1991, which provides a hint of how recent its usage is. Here's an article I found at random that's a play on both uses of the expression: [3] Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a random fan discussion in which the term "no-no" is being used in reference to a game that had a final score of 7-1. Not a usable source for wikipedia, but an indication that the notion that it means "no hit no run" is not universally agreed upon. [4] Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another random discussion [5] that equates "no-no" to no-hitter, not to "no hit no run". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a theoretically more reliable source, a writeup in the New York Times about Andy Hawkins who pitched a no-hitter and lost 4-0. [6] Dave Righetti advised him to "just think of it as a no-no", the writer saying "no-no" is baseball slang for "no-hitter" (obviously not "no hit no run"). Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I still think that's what "no-no" means, but even if it definitely does, it wouldn't be accurate, because (as stated later in the article) runs can be scored against a pitcher that throws an official no-hitter. I think the compromise (of neither adjective nor definition) is best. — Demong _talk 01:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Unless we can get a definitive explanation of its origin (because it's only been in recent years that they've called it that), our only safe factual ground is to state that it's a synonym for no-hitter; there's no dispute about that. I'm curious to know where it came from, but as with many slang terms, it might be hard to pin down. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm, how about "Halladay hurls a no-no" from MLB.com? Or this, "Doctober! No-no for Halladay in playoff debut"? If you're worried about it being recent, Dock Ellis recalls thinking "still got my no-no" in this documentary. That's from 1970. 72.66.64.146 (talk) 01:34, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No-no is colloquial for no-hitter and both are synonymous. The term has never had anything to do with runs scored or lack there of. In everyday (non-baseball) life, when a mother tells a kid that playing in the street is a no-no, the first no and the second no mean the same thing. In baseball terminology, the first no and the second no of no-no mean one thing and one thing only: no hits.

Yesterday, Ervin Santana gave up a run and pitched a no-hitter. Here's two links from espn.com's coverage of santana's no-no yesterday.

7 seconds into this video, the espn dude calls angel no-hitter a no-no (despite giving up a run) http://espn.go.com/blog/los-angeles/angels/post/_/id/3191/rapid-reaction-ervin-santanas-no-hitter

54 seconds into this one, another espn dude calls it a no-no http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=310727105 Mattbluth (talk) 03:51, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Two points:

1) Why did you add "child-like expression" before "no-no"? That is subjective, irrelevant, and clutters the first sentence of the article, which is the most important. It's frequently called a "no-no" (esp by certain sportscasters) and it is not childlike.

2) Why "line score" instead of the official term "box score", which also had a link to an article on baseball box scores? — Demong _talk 00:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TV broadcasts don't show box scores on commercial breaks, they only show line scores. If they showed the entire box score, it would take the entire commercial break to read it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you're right; will keep it line score but make that a link to baseball box score, which has a line score at the top. Striking "child-like". — Demong _talk 00:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a compromise, striking both "childlike" and the unsupported assertion that it stands for "no hit no run". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ergh, okay... — Demong _talk 00:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One more quibble on something I deleted and you replaced: "References in this article are up to date through the 2007 regular season and post-season games."

The intro section does not refer specifically to MLB, but to no-hitters in baseball generally. This sentence should definitely not be in the lead, and arguably doesn't have any value at all... why put it anywhere? — Demong _talk 00:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might have a point about that. The reason I put it there was to get around various random and inconsistent references in the notes section that said "through the [yyyy] season". Simpler to remove those and put it in one place. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree, Wikipedia isn't the place for disclaimers. At the very least, please move it somewhere into "No-hitters in MLB", if you don't strike it entirely. — Demong _talk 00:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I qualified it, but maybe moving it is better. And it's not a "disclaimer", it's an explanation. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Word. — Demong _talk 01:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you could go back into each individual reference to a record and say "through the 2007 season", if you see value in that vs. a single line that covers it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No I just meant that sounds fine; if someone else cares more than I do they can go through it :P but it would be better to just keep all references as up-to-date as possible... that line becomes a disclaimer once the 2008 season starts, etc. — Demong _talk 01:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't sure what you meant by "word", and I'm still not. In any case, I moved it into the major league section and thus removed the redundant reference to "major league". And once the 2008 season starts to happen, it can be modified as needed. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Word up", basically, just affirmative :) — Demong _talk 01:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that one. Must be a young, hip expression. I'm neither. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because of tonight's 8-inning no-hitter, this was a point of discussion on Baseball Tonight, and they flashed a graphic showing the following names having 8-inning no-hitters

Fred Frankhouse (1937) Henry Gastright (1890) Charles King (1890) Charlie Gagus (1884)

In addition to tonight's and the two from the 1990s. This is information we don't have, so it should probably be worked in somehow. Tromboneguy0186 (talk) 04:51, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and added the text, but how the heck do you cite something like this? Tromboneguy0186 (talk) 05:39, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They showed a graphic of eight inning no hitters, but were they ones where they LOST? MLB and Elias say there were just five since 1900; Frankhouse was not among them. He may have pitched eight no hit innings but not lost the game in some way:

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/history/rare_feats/index.jsp?feature=no_hitter_loss

I have removed those extra three, Frankhouse and the two 19th century instances as shown on BT last night. Perhaps we should write something new in another section (or create another section) mentioning eight-inning no hitters alone, since they are rare too.

--CapeCanaveral321 (talk) 22:57, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How else can you throw an eight-inning no-hitter where you don't get to pitch the ninth? I guess it could have been games called because of darkness, given the era, but that's about all I can think of. Tromboneguy0186 (talk) 12:00, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Until just a few years ago, when the suspended game rule became applied much more broadly, a game could go any number of innings and be rained out or whatever. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 12:12, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After reading about a recent Angels-Dodgers game, some questions, points about no hitters came up.

I think the intro paragraph could maybe be modified to make clear the difference between a no hitter game, and a game in which a pitcher pitches a not hitter. It's clarified later on, but it would be good, I think, to make this clear from the start.

I think it would be nice to list no hitter games, which were retracted after the rules were changed on the length of no hitter games.

166.34.158.130 (talk) 15:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible for there to be a double no hitter in a game cause I think both pitchers can have no hit games but one would have allowed at least 1 run via error, walk, sac fly, or sac bunt while the other would have had to get a no hit shutout or allow less runs than his opponents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.255.177.179 (talk) 19:13, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is possible, just hasn't happened yet. It almost happened in Sandy Koufax's perfect game.Neonblak (talk) 11:39, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A double perfect game is also theoretically possible, if it goes 9 innings or more and ends in a 0-0 tie, being called due to some problem such as lengthy and heavy rain. Extremely unlikely under today's rules about suspended games, but still theoretically possible. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 11:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's true...I suppose a hypothetical situation would for the both teams to be out of the pennant race so the game isn't needed to be played to its conclusion at the end of the season.Neonblak (talk) 12:15, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two events of very low separate probability occurring in the same game. The lack of even a simple true double no-hitter in baseball history suggests the low magnitude of likeliness of a double perfect game. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 12:24, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While this is a very old thread, for completeness: there were 9 innings of a double no-hitter thrown in MLB on May 2, 1917, by Hippo Vaughn of the Chicago Cubs and Fred Toney of the Cincinnati Reds. The box score is here on Retrosheet. Being scoreless, the game went into extra innings. In the top of the 10th, Vaughn allowed an unearned run on two hits and an error, with that one run driven in by Jim Thorpe. Toney did not allow any hits in the bottom of the 10th, thus successfully completing his no-hitter. Vaughn's effort was also considered a no-hitter until MLB tightened the rules/definition for no-hitters in 1991. See List of Major League Baseball no-hitters. Dmoore5556 (talk) 23:25, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have finally looked at this article enough, and I think this needs alot of love. I am going to make it my mission to redo this page. This topic, someone has labelled as "TOP" priority, needs a direction, a coherant outline, and expanded. I will make a note of my intention on the Baseball Wikiproject page, and if anyone else wants to help out with some ideas or editing, please do.Neonblak (talk) 11:52, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you could outline your plan, or be more specific about what the issues are. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 11:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I announced my intention to do so. I didn't say I actually have a plan as of yet, the article appears to me a random collection of facts, more trivial than informative. Maybe a "History of the no-hitter" section could be created after the lead section "Definition", going back into the time before the "Major Leagues". Just an example. There has to be someone who has pondered this very same thing, and would have some ideas as well. Certainly, with a little elbow grease, this could get moved up in class a few steps, i.e. GA. Plus, I am getting bored with my usual work on individual 19th century baseball players. Neonblak (talk) 12:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you could similarly assess the perfect game article for comparison. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 12:25, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The player who pitched no-hitters that were separated by the longest period of time is Nolan Ryan. Randy Johnson is not "The pitcher who holds the record for the longest period between no-hitters" - his no-hitters were separated by less than 14 years, much less than the near-18 year period between Ryan's first on May 15, 1973 and his last on May 1, 1991. To not credit Ryan for this record because he pitched additional no-hitters between his first and last would make no sense. --Noren (talk) 04:46, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is about the time span between a no-hitter by a pitcher and the next one by the pitcher, not about the span from the first to the last no-hitter by a pitcher, but this record is not that important anyway. --Anaxagoras13 (talk) 17:03, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

today, the D-backs beat the Padres 9-6 in 18 innings. throughout the final 9 innings (innings 10-18), Arizona's bullpen kept the Padres to zero hits. I don't know if this has happened before, but I think it deserves some recognition in this article somewhere. --173.49.13.67 (talk) 02:40, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think its worth putting in It happened today June 30 2011 when the Cubs bullpen following the early departure of Carlos Zambrano because of injury, went from one out in the third until 2 outs in the 13th without allowing a hit. 6 pitchers combined for the 30 outs between hits. I still don't know how many other times it has happened. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.193.19.253 (talk) 22:06, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe it is sufficiently notable to list a team's former pitchers that have thrown no-hitters for a different team. I guess the implication is that if the team had kept the player, it might have had a no-hitter as part of its history, but this seems too much of a "what-if" game to include. So many things have to go right for a no-hitter, not the least of which is team defence helping out, and so no-hitters thrown for another team aren't really indicative of anything for the former team. I propose removing the references to former pitchers throwing no-hitters for other teams. Isaac Lin (talk) 07:08, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I said "coincidentally". It has become kind of a joke that there is apparently some "jinx" that keeps Mets pitchers from being able to achieve no-hitters. (Overlooking the fact that just being a Met might be the jinx itself.) It's a spurious correlation, one would think. Look at how long since the last Cubs no-hitter, for example - it was 36 years between Pappas and Zambrano, although they had some pretty good clubs in the interim. Avoiding being no-hit has perhaps more notability, as it says something about the nature of the team - that there's always someone in the lineup with some "pop". And Forbes Field's spaciousness is the conventional wisdom for why it went parts of 63 seasons without seeing a no-hitter. Maybe the Mets thing is too trivial, I dunno. It used to have more documentation around it. It's not exactly like the Curse of the Bambino, but it's odd that a club in its 48th season, especially a club with a reputation for pitching, has somehow never managed to get a no-hitter. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 07:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which marks the following information as not being notable. In the Mets article, where the scope would be limited to the Mets, it may fit, but in this article, it opens the door to a lot more coincidences being included, which gives them undue importance. Isaac Lin (talk) 07:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One remedy might be to see whether any of the other teams without no-hitters have also had ex-pitchers throw no-hitters elsewhere. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 07:45, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Rays, Rockies and Padres have also never thrown no-hitters. The Pods, in particular, have been around 40 years, which is also a long time to go without. The article mentions the "closest one" for the Pods, but I recall when Preston Gomez, while managing the Pods, actually lifted a pitcher for a pinch-hitter, while the pitcher had a no-hitter going. In fact, he did that twice - for 2 different teams - which might indicate the pathetic kinds of teams Preston was stuck with. Anyway, I'm beginning to see what you're getting at - that this opens a can of worms to all manner of "near misses" and stuff like that, and risks having the article lose some focus. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 07:50, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does this mean you agree with the proposed removal of references to no-hitters thrown by former players? I think there are too many similar coincidences that could be noted for these four teams and potentially for other scenarios in this article to make this notable for this article. Isaac Lin (talk) 01:28, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because much of the article deals with no-hitters as defined by MLB's rules (and, in particular, the revised rules from 1991), to avoid ambiguity, I have restored the "Major League Baseball" section. Isaac Lin (talk) 23:54, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the desire to break up the article in a few more sections rather than having most of it under the MLB section. However, because the "Near no-hitters", "Teams without no-hitters", and "Avoiding no-hitters" are all related either to MLB's specific definition or to no-hitters in the context of MLB, if these sections are not under the MLB section, then the text has to be constantly qualified with phrases such as "under MLB rules", or else the the article will be vulnerable to criticism for having a regional point of view. To make the text less awkward, I propose keeping these sections under the MLB section. Isaac Lin (talk) 01:15, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A number of articles start with MLB anymore. Maybe the details could be spun off into an article about MLB no-hitters, opening the potential for separate articles no-hitters in the Japanese leagues, remarkable no-hitters in the minor leagues, etc. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:26, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean by "A number of articles start with MLB anymore"? I think it may be a bit premature for the article to split, though once there is information added for other leagues, the usefulness of a split may be more apparent. Isaac Lin (talk) 03:08, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Type MLB into the search box and you'll see some. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:15, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "anymore"? Isaac Lin (talk) 03:38, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Old-fashioned way of saying "nowadays". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:40, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any further comments on retaining the various sub-sections specific to no-hitters in MLB beneath the MLB section? Putting in qualifications everywhere makes the text more clunky, so in spite of the resulting article structure, I believe this is the best option for now. Isaac Lin (talk) 15:09, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If there are no further comments, I plan to move the sections following the proposal. Isaac Lin (talk) 23:01, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not revert the copy editing changes without further discussion, as Wikipedia guidelines encourage collaborative editing rather than simply reverting someone's changes. Isaac Lin (talk) 01:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, according to Retrosheet, the St. Louis Cardinals did not play on May 12, 1919. Do you have another source for the start of the hitting streak on this day? Isaac Lin (talk) 01:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Though I can understand that some are interested, I'm not sure the exact count of games in the Mets' hitting streak is sufficient notable to warrant regular updates. Perhaps the text could be revised to avoid a specific mention of the current number of games in the streak? Isaac Lin (talk) 00:51, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any team has had an ongoing hitting streak since the last time they were no-hit. Constantly updating it seems pointless. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:56, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Besides which, the Mets don't have a hitting streak going, it's their opponents, as the Mets have never pitched a no-hitter. Either way, constantly updating that figure is pointless, just as would be constantly updating the Cubs' hitting streak, which unless I missed a news story has the longest hitting streak - they were last no-hit in 1965. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:58, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies — I mixed up the two. The Mets number seems to be updated based on a web site, while I have no idea where the Cubs count of games comes from. Isaac Lin (talk) 06:34, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To the person who re-added the count of games without having pitched a no-hitter: can you please participate in this discussion? Isaac Lin (talk) 23:29, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I merged content from the "Unusual no-hitters" to earlier sections and removed duplicated content. I removed content that I thought to be less notable/intersecting unrelated traits, but I realize some may disagree. Please feel free to discuss further. Isaac Lin (talk) 03:01, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think Doc Ellis' no-hitter on LSD is incredibly interesting, and it is certainly widely-known and notable. I'm just not quite sure under what section it should be included. Thoughts? Oreo Priest ^talk 12:22, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone confirmed he was really on LSD and not just making up a story? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, nobody possibly can. But Snopes lists the rumour (already a sign of notability), and further lists it as (tentatively) true. Oreo Priest ^talk 19:50, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Then it's "tentatively" unusual at most. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:52, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's an interesting note for Doc Ellis; I'm not quite decided on how notable it is for the topic of MLB no-hitters in general. Though it is unique (so far as we know), I'm sure every no-hitter has its back story, and I'm not sure how to determine which ones are suitable for this article. Isaac Lin (talk) 21:05, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Statistically speaking, every no-hitter is unusual. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:15, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Under the Individual section

Previously Jim Maloney had been listed as one of 5 men who pitched two no-hitters in the same season. However the first of these no-hitters did not count as an official no-hitter because he allowed a hit in top of 11th inning. I changed the section around and noted the details of the no-hitter. However,my wording is very clunky and it could be a lot easier to read I think. If anyone can take a look at that, I appreciate it.

Jpenven (talk) 00:38, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The current article states that only three catchers have caught no-hitters in both leagues:

"Only three catchers have caught a no-hitter in each league: Gus Triandos, Jeff Torborg, and Ron Hassey. Triandos caught Hoyt Wilhelm's 1958 no-hitter and Jim Bunning's perfect game, Torborg caught Sandy Koufax's perfect game and Nolan Ryan's first no-hitter, and Hassey caught Len Barker's and Dennis Martinez's perfect games."

This is incorrect; Darrell Porter did this as well. Porter caught Jim Colborn's 1977 no-hitter as a member of the Kansas City Royals in the AL ^[1], and caught Bob Forsch's second no-hitter in 1983 as a member of the St. Louis Cardinals in the NL ^[2].

This is indicated on both the Wikipedia No-hitter list^[3], and on the Darrell Porter Wiki entry.

BronzeUnicorn (talk) 06:26, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now that there is only one team in MLB without a no-hitter in its history, the section formerly known as "teams without a no-hitter" now almost entirely discusses historical no-hitter droughts. Changing the title is both more accurate to the content and will keep the section relevant when the Padres finally get their no-no too. It will also open it up to significant content not currently included in the article eg. the Phillies' 58-year no-hitter gap between 1906 and 1964. I will try to add some of this in the coming weeks but would very much welcome help as I will not have much time to devote to the necessary research.

"No-hitter droughts" is IMO a rather awkward phrase but I cannot think of a more concise and accurate alternative. --Threephi (talk) 08:40, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The No Hitter Drought section is bit misleading. It took me a while, but I now understand that it intended to show the time between no-hitters on a single team, not between no-hitters. Maybe this should be clarified. 108.38.29.226 (talk) 04:15, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on No-hitter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080526075129/http://www.baseballlibrary.com/chronology/byyear.php?year=1890 to http://www.baseballlibrary.com/chronology/byyear.php?year=1890
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dushkin.com/olc/genarticle.mhtml?article=27128

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:54, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Previous editors contributed to this section under the impression that Rich Hill's 10-inning loss to the Pirates applies, since he pitched 9 no-hit innings, and eventually lost the game. Problem is, he lost the game on a walk-off homer, meaning his no-hitter got broken up, meaning it's not an official no-hitter per MLB rules. Therefore, Rich Hill's game does not belong in this section.

This section's requirements:

1)Pitched 9+ innings.

2)Lost the game.

3)Counts as an official no-hitter.

The purpose of this section, is that teams are capable of scoring runs in spite of having zero hits. The Pirates scored their run against Rich Hill, by getting a hit (homer). The reason the title says "Nine-inning no-hitters", is to clarify that eight-inning no-hitters do not officially count as a no-hitter (this happens when the away team throws a no-hitter, and doesn't pitch the bottom 9th inning, due to their team losing the game in the top 9th).

I know this is very nit-picky about the rules. But that's why Harvey Haddix's 13-inning loss is not in this section either. There is a section for Rich Hill's game, the "No-hitters lost in extra innings" section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Strangewrite385 (talk • contribs) 02:29, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is anybody else aware that there is a problem when you sort the table by its rightmost column of time since the franchise's last no-hitter? Specifically, it is calculating the time since each no-hitter up to the date the article was last edited, rather than the current date. I could only get it to update by making a phantom "edit" in which I didn't actually change anything. 172.58.139.134 (talk) 02:27, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I added an (as of 2 May 2018) parenthetical to that column, as a temporary measure until somebody who knows how to code this stuff better comes along and fixes it. 172.58.139.134 (talk) 02:32, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pages are cached; did you try reloading the page with ";action=purge" added to the end of the address? isaacl (talk) 03:06, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No-hitter with complete game shutout win section needs overhaul. Did that happen once or multiple times. For a part it seems it's about a single team and a single player then it seems like it's about the whole league . Very messy. 213.149.62.165 (talk) 15:00, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph two states there have been 307 no-hitters. Further down, “Frequency” states 309. The related article “List of Major League Baseball no-hitters” splits the difference and says 308. 2601:14D:4480:CE0:FDC5:212D:9372:C56B (talk) 01:51, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, how is it useful to mention games that weren't no-hitters because they were less than nine innings? They can't be no-hitters by definition, and that article is about games that are. May as well also mention how many no-hitters didn't count because a team recorded hits. To me it's trivial unsourced recentism that doesn't belong in the lead. Echoedmyron (talk) 19:02, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really agree that it's a point of recentism considering how exceptional the circumstances were to create MLB games that were less than 9 innings. 7-inning MLB games will continue to be exceptional into the future (one would hope) and "no-hitters" pitched during them is an interesting point. I did edit the wording just now to clear up the "unofficial no-hitter" issue, do you think that's better? WPscatter ^t/_c 20:54, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I've just found a couple of sources that do call them "unofficial no-hitters". [7] [8] I could see the argument that it doesn't belong in the lead if the 2021 season didn't already have a reason to be mentioned in the lead. Since 2021 is the season with the most "real" no-hitters (and will have a lead paragraph regardless) I think the point about "unofficial" ones adds useful context. WPscatter ^t/_c 21:06, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a recent occurrence: rain-shortened no-hitters and perfect games were official throughout most of MLB history until it re-defined them to require a minimum of nine innings. In this particular context, personally I think it is OK to mention the abbreviated no-hitters. I am wary of mentioning them in general, though. isaacl (talk) 21:23, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was calling it recentism specifically because yes it was talking about 2021 at what I felt to be an inappropriate degree in the lead. But on reflection I accept the argument that it is completing the thought raised by the initial mention of that specific season, and the rewording by Wpscatter is an improvement.Echoedmyron (talk) 21:37, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for the confusion. I was responding to Wpscatter that the circumstances creating MLB games which are less than 9 innings aren't a recent occurrence. Also, although I was only referring to it obliquely, official no-hitters and perfect games requiring nine innings is, historically speaking, the recent occurrence. isaacl (talk) 21:43, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]