Talk:List of Major League Baseball pitchers who have thrown an immaculate inning

message: On August 23rd, 2001, Randy Johnson pitched a 5-1 loss to the pirates, not the Cubs.  I can't tell from a box score at baseballreference.com if he struck out the 3 batters in the 6th on 9 pitches or not, but the score does say they all struck out. On the 18th, he pitched a 5-3 win over the cubs, but the 6th inning did not end in 9 pitches.  This article should be cross-referenced more thoroughly as this is the second error in data I've seen. Found another error, Magnete pitched vs. the Rockies.... Mtxchevy 15:19, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The trivia section mention's Bob Gibson a couple of times, yet he's not listed on the chart, is there a reason for that? Darwin's Bulldog 07:45, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Where's Gibson on the list?

message: I was attempting to use www.retrosheet.org to fill in some of the missing opposing batters information. It turns out that on August 19, 1975, McGlothlen did strike out three batters in the second inning . However, because Tony Perez singled to begin this inning, I do not feel that he has truly acheived this feat, which requires complete nine pitch domination in one, immaculate, inning. I have e-mailed the errors department at Baseball Almanac about this potential error. Until that issue is resolved, I have deleted McGlothen's inning from this page.Mehmattski 04:53, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lynn McGlothen's Immaculate Inning

message: I found some more information on immaculate innings via this 2004 article in Baseball Digest: . From the text:
"Hod Eller of the Reds is listed in the Baseball Record Book as having fanned three batters on nine pitches in the ninth inning on August 21, 1917, but research in the New York Times box scores for that date indicates that New York Giants outfielder Joe Wilhoit led off the inning against Eller with a bunt single."
The article also has information on Lynn McGlothen's supposed immaculate inning, as well as hitters for Rube Waddel's feat. So now, the only immaculate innings for which the batters are unavailable are Clarkson's and Ragan's.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehmattski (talk • contribs) 03:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hod Eller 

message: Does anybody have any information on in which of these occurrences the batters didn't even touch the ball once? Additionally, occurrences where the batters didn't even attempt to swing?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.21.51.233 (talk) 18:58, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  No fouls and no swing 

message: Wasn't Ryan a rookie when he accomplished it in 1968?  He was only up for a cup of coffee in 1966, and did not play in the majors in 1967.  In fact, I thought 1969 was his official rookie year.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:07, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ryan/rookie 

message: I do not recall seeing that term before.  My only question is: Is there any name given to going through an inning (getting 3 outs) on just 3 pitches?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 16:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  just saw "immaculate inning" for 1st time 

message: It says at http://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Danny_Jackson that Danny Jackson struck out the side on nine pitches in Game Five of the '85 series, bottom of the seventh. This would be the only time it happened in a World Series. Can someone come up with a corroborating citation? Ellsworth (talk) 00:02, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: [[1985 World Series]]

message: I known nothing whatsoever about baseball, but from an English-language point of view, "struck out three batters on nine pitches" sounds wrong to me. Is this some special baseball lingo?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.220.139 (talk) 13:35, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preposition? 

message: 128.135.100.108 (talk) 23:18, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Carlos Contreras 

message: As illustrated in the above exchange between TCav and Bloom6132, the title of this article is at least confusing, if not incomplete or inaccurate.  For being confusing, the title is also overly verbose.  As the article states, this feat is "commonly known as an immaculate inning"--why not simply use the common name as the article title? The introduction could then be focused on first defining the requirements of an immaculate inning: when a single pitcher strikes out the side using only 9 pitches in the inning.
Renaming this page would also bring it into conformance with articles for similar baseball accomplishments, such as: Perfect game and List of Major League Baseball players to hit for the cycle.
Msherby (talk) 02:00, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd suggest starting a requested move as that would likely get more input. Lizard (talk) 18:58, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to Change Article Name to "List of Major League Baseball Immaculate Innings" or variation thereof 

message: Max Scherzer just threw his second immaculate inning (in his career and in as many years), so we're going to need to figure out a new way to address the photos now that five MLB pitchers have recorded multiple immaculate innings in their careers. -Kudzu1 (talk) 00:46, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo collage 

message: We need a page about the Three-Pitch-Inning, also a very impressive pitching feat. The Baseball Reference has a list of pitchers who have done it. It does not explain the curious gap between 1920 and 1969 in which there were almost no such innings.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.164.21.214 (talk) 16:57, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Three-Pitch Inning 

message: It would be interesting to see a breakdown of American League vs National League.  Obviously, it would be easier to through a 3 pitch strikeout vs a pitcher than vs a fielder.  As American League pitchers never throw against pitchers, presumably it is a harder feat for them.  However, in the 4 or 5 cases that I looked at, none of them had a pitcher as one of the victim batters.  It would be interesting to see a full breakdown on this topic.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.123.208.30 (talk) 18:08, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  American League vs National League 

message: Chris Sale got his second Immaculate Inning last night on June 5th, 2019. He's the first pitcher since Lefty Grove to have 2 in one season.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.66.209.30 (talk) 18:52, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update needed for Sale 

message: There seems to be some controversy over whether :Roger Clemens should be included on this list or not for a game in September 1997.
These sources say he did throw an immaculate inning:
* MLB.com's list
* Baseball-reference's boxscore (see Play by Play). This one does acknowledge its not always accurate.
 has mentioned these sources as evidence that Clemens does not belong on the list:
* Boston Globe article (there's a paywall here, I can't verify)
* Highlights from ESPN from that game
I actually don't believe Clemens did throw one, but MLB's list is harder to argue with.
Looking for consensus on this. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 20:54, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roger Clemens 

message: The link (to the first mention in the article) is broken. It seems to me that a truly "immaculate" inning would not include such things as a 350 foot foul ball or for that matter, any contact with the ball, yet this is not part of the definition. BrianAlex (talk) 00:31, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where does this silly phrase originate?  

message: Well, just an easy question ... shouldn't there be an article about immaculate innings (ii) itself, instead of only one about MLB ii records?
I mean, there's an article about home runs in general. And about home run records. There is an article about what a perfect game is. And an article about a list of perfect games. Another article tells me what a no-hitter is and another one explains hitting for the cycle. And two different articles give a list of no-hitters and cycle hitters.
But there is no article about ii in general. Just an article with a ridiculously long name called List of Major League Baseball pitchers who have thrown an immaculate inning (seriously, wouldn't List of ii in MLB suffice?). But this article doesn't tell me anything about ii, it just gives me a quite long introduction of what an ii is (could be skipped if there would be an ii article) followed by a list of MLB pitchers doing so. NPB? Yeaaaah, no. MiLB? Nope. History of ii? Nada.
It's like having an article about home run records without an article about what a home run is. Hell, it's like having a list of World Series winners without an article of what baseball is. 95.90.251.172 (talk) 23:52, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Immaculate inning" article 

message: He pitched an immaculate inning on September 2, 2023 with the caveat that a batter reached base on an intentional walk. 2A00:7C40:C680:6C3:CC34:B53C:90E9:5F83 (talk) 07:30, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe a requirement of the immaculate inning is that the pitcher must face precisely the minimum of three batters, and strike them all out in the minimum number of pitches. After all, intentionally walking someone is, in spirit, failing to strike the batter out, which would be an argument against "immaculacy." MLB's official list also says "three up, three down", so it stands to reason that a pitcher intentionally walking someone and facing more than three batters would not count. GalacticShoe (talk) 00:16, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robert Stephenson 

message: Johnson's inning was marked as disputed in two edits here:  , .  The reference to this is an image, and that image no longer loads and isn't backed up on the Wayback Machine.  I see that the official scoreline still lists 9 strikes in a row at .  Can I ask where exactly this dispute is coming from, and if there's a replacement reference?  If this dispute can't be referenced to a secondary source, it shouldn't be marked as disputed at all.  SnowFire (talk) 03:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: You can see the inning play out (with the 1-1 ball at 1:22:00) in the full game video at this moment. Also, while BBRef hasn't updated their information yet, I believe Retrosheet's pitch data has, with BBRef just taking some time to catch up. I have to check the version of Retrosheet's data I have downloaded, but I remember seeing it when I look recently. GalacticShoe (talk) 04:11, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough.  Of course, I don't think we can actually link that recording as a reference without the express written consent of Major League Baseball blah blah under WP:ELNEVER.  So...  kind of have a problem as far as WP:V is concerned.  It doesn't look like Retrosheet has pitch-by-pitch data for this game?  Or am I misreading it?  Is there some other secondary source on this perhaps?  SnowFire (talk) 04:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah unfortunately I'm not sure if there's a way to find pitch-by-pitch data on the Retrosheet website itself, you kinda have to dig in the actual source data to find it. It's a pain, but in the events folder, in 1998ATL.EVN, you can find the at-bat at line 10794 (you can get to that game's section by searching for "id,ATL199809020"), where it says "play,6,1,colbg001,12,SBFS,K" GalacticShoe (talk) 05:10, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

text: @SnowFire BBRef has just updated, and now the counts for Johnson and Mussina have the corresponding extra pitches. GalacticShoe (talk) 04:08, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Dispute" on Randy Johnson's inning 

message: As it stands, Hall of Famers get a special dagger marker and a different background shade in the list.  Can I ask the logic behind this?  There are lots of places where HOF membership is relevant, but this doesn't appear to be one of them - it's not like Hall of Famers do immaculate innings in just 8 pitches or something.  None of these players were members of the HOF when they pitched these innings.  I'd say the special marking should be removed unless there's a clear reason for it (e.g. if secondary sources tie these facts together).  SnowFire (talk) 03:27, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marking Hall of Fame players separately