#1
|
|||
|
|||
More rare: Cycle or No-Hitter?
I'm having trouble trying to find the number that each has been done in history, but which feat do you think is more rare? I know no-hitter seems like the obvious answer. But, this is what makes me think it might not be. In each game, there are 9 batters in each lineup and only 2 starting pitchers. So, each game has an opportunity for 18 cycles but only 2 no hitters. Therefore, wouldn't it be that if there are 9x more cycles than no hitters, they are happening at the same rate? So, if there are less than 9x more cycles than no-hitters, would that make the cycle more rare?
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: More rare: Cycle or No-Hitter?
IIRC, there have actually been more no-hitters than cycles. Or at least the numbers are very close.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: More rare: Cycle or No-Hitter?
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: More rare: Cycle or No-Hitter?
I put two lists into excel and came up with :
Cycle: 136 No hitter: 297 I make no vouchers for the accuracy of those statistics. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: More rare: Cycle or No-Hitter?
since 2000, 22 players have hit for the cycle and 7 pitchers have thrown a no hitter. So at least for the past 5 years, cycles are more common.
|
|
|