[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see how anyone can say a hitting streak in the 30's is comparable to a hitting streak in the 50's. The most important component to hitting streaks is batting average, and then you need to get lucky. So unless guys back then had much higher averages then your argument doesn't hold any water, no matter how nice it might sound.

[/ QUOTE ]

You say batting avg. is the most important and then luck. Well ok, but you realize there is more to the game than a number and luck. You still have to square the ball up consistently for weeks on end (maybe a couple times in a streak that long is pure luck involved: such as a 1-4 day with an infield single or a blown call to go your way). And to square up the baseball that consistently for that long means that all of the factors that I mentioned and that come in contact with the game are big influences during a streak.

Luck plays a big part in a streak, there is no denying that b/c you can't hide from the day in which you line out 3-4 times in a day. Luck also is a big part of baseball in general, but a streak that long isn't ALL luck, b/c the skill to be able to stay in a groove for that long is needed and it takes more skill today than it did forty or fifty years ago.

All of my points are valid comparing difficulty to the game today and the game then.