text:
Circassia /
North Caucasus /
Ethnicity in the Caucasus: Ethnic Relations and Quasi-Ethnic Conflicts, by S.A. Arutiunov
S.A. Arutiunov
Head, Caucasian Studies Department Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology Russian Academy of Sciences
I. The Caucasus and Nationality
A. The Caucasus and Ethnicity
Are ethnic conflicts inevitable? Is there a fatal predestination for every ethnic entity to compete with other ethnic entities in a Darwinian struggle for existence, to see the only guarantee of its own ethnic reproduction in the expulsion, suppression or extermination of other ethnic groups? Given its patchwork of ethnic diversity, perhaps no part of the former Soviet Union provides more fertile ground for interethnic strife than the Caucasus region. The civil war in Chechnya is seen as indicative of the potential for greater instability in the region. Alternatively, this report contends that, although political cleavages in the Caucasus often mirror ethnic divisions, at heart these disputes are as much economic and political conflicts, triggered by the ongoing uncertainty of economic transformation, as ethnic conflicts. Given this, despite extensive ethnic diversity, the Caucasus region is not invariably condemned to ethnic turmoil.
B. A Taxonomy of Ethnic Identity
The birth of ethnicity or of a particular ethnic unit can be considered as a process of adaptation to a cultural or social environment analogous to natural selection. Unlike the animal kingdom, the development of human ethnic groups entails both a biological exchange as well as the transference of cultural information and values through socialization. Having once emerged, ethnic identity tends to reproduce itself as a means for group competition for identity and resources. Such extended self-reproduction becomes the raison d'etre of ethnic group activity.
That being said, ethnic groups vary as to the intensity of ethnic identity and the types of activities and political objectives pursued. Ethnic groups can be classified based on the density of intra-group communication as the key distinguishing feature. At the lowest level, tribes are primarily denoted by oral communication traditions with a limited scope for ethnic communication. The development of written traditions allows nationalities (or, in Russian, narodnosti) to emerge. Finally, as deeper and more extended communication networks develop via mass media and mass education, the highest type of ethnicity, a nation, emerges. Nations differ from narodnosti in that they seek to establish an independent nation-state and primacy over other ethnic groups within a given territory. This sort of interaction is readily observable in the southern Caucasus in the Armenian-Azeri conflict around Karabakh, in Georgia's military intervention in Abkhazia, in Azerbaijan's claims to the oil resources of the Caspian shelf, and in the general squeezing out or restriction of ethnic or cultural minorities in all the newly independent Trascaucasian nations.
In contrast, not only the northern Caucasus, but probably in the whole Russian Federation, only four ethnic groups can fairly be labeled nations: Volga Tartars, Chechnyans, Yakuts and Tuvans. Narodnosti would certainly include Buriats, Chusvashs, Bashkirs, and -- although with less certainty - Ossets, Kabardins, Adyghes, Karachais and Maris. Finally, those groups best labeled as tribes would include Karels, Komis, Udmorts, Mordvins, Khahass, Altaians, Balkars, Cherkess and Kalmyks. The different classes of ethnic groups in the northern Caucasus have all undertaken actions aimed at ethnic self-assertion and self-reproduction. Yet while all pursue ethnic issues and seek to establish an ethnic "space," it would be misguided to assume that ethnic competition invariably leads to violent conflict. Only Chechnya has openly fought for full independence. Other strategies to increase ethnic autonomy include negotiating treaties with Moscow for new rights and privileges for the republic under the Federal Constitution (done in North Ossetia and Kabardin-Balkaria) or declaring the republic an "economic free zone" (done in Ingushetia). Even for groups fairly labeled as nations, the move to full independence may be undesirable, since none of the Caucasian republics can be economically self-supporting. The great mistake to be made in analyzing the Caucasus is to assume that all groups are essentially nations seeking to carve out independent nation-states from the old Soviet republics.
C. Ethnic or Political Conflict?
A good example of this can be seen in disputes between Georgia and Abkhazia. Abkhazia had long been associated with Georgia under the Soviet system and Abkhazians lived peacefully within a Georgian-dominated media and educational structure. Politically and culturally, however, Abkhazians were more oriented to Russia - which was larger and less culturally threatening - than Georgia. Yet this ethnic marriage was largely nonproblematic until the collapse of the Soviet Union. With the dissolution of the USSR, Abkhazians resisted incorporation into the newly independent Georgian nation, leading ultimately to the Georgian-Abkhazian War of 1992-93, which produced de facto independence from Georgia. Superficially, this seems like the classic example of an inter-ethnic conflict. Although true in a strict sense, there is really no great ethnic enmity between Georgians and Abkhazians, noted by a high percentage of mixed marriages. Abkhazian demands were not for independence as an expression of nationhood, but rather for association with federal Russia rather than Georgia. The conflict turned on the desire to change political association, not to secure ethnic independence per se.
All of this leads to the conclusion that the essence of most of the conflicts in the Caucasus is not inherent and historically predetermined enmity between ethnic units, but results rather from political manipulations of the ethnic elite, which tries to exploit ethnic identity to safeguard for themselves the benefits of political power during a period of economic transformation.
II. The Ethnic Situation in the Northern Caucasus
A. Adygea, Karachai-Cherkessia, and Kabardin-Balkaria
This section will outline the nature and roots of ethnic conflicts in the various regions of the northern Caucasus. The demographic numbers provided are very arbitrary and approximate, since the exact numbers of ethnic groups in the territories are not available. The analysis will move along the "east-west axis" because there are significant cultural and economic differences between the western and eastern territories. The western regions contain a higher percentage of ethnic Russian (i.e., 80% of the population in the Krasnodar and Stavropol territories, but only 10% in Dagestan) and people tend to be culturally Western oriented. The level of industrialization and urbanization also decline as one moves east, just as the relative importance of the Islamic faith rises in the east. The following analysis is based on analysis of the local press and various documents, direct observations of the author, and various conversations with colleagues from all Caucasian republics.
In the small territory of Adygea, which is encircled on all sides by the primarily Russian Krasnodar Territory, relations between Adygean and ethnic Russians are quite friendly. Russians make up more than half of the population within Adygea and the current President, Jarimov (an ethnic Adygean) was elected largely on the support of Russian votes. Russians may express some discontent over the domination of Adygeans in retail commerce, but the level of dissension is minimal. Some nationalistically minded Adygeans hope for the restoration of a "Greater Adygea", which would include Cherkessia and Kabardinia. Adygeans, Cherkessians and Kabardins share a common cultural and linguistic "Adyghe" identity. Among all Adyghes, the Adygeans certainly have the strongest feeling of all-Adyghe common destiny.
Equally, however, the Adygeans have preserved some tribal divisions. Among the twenty odd tribes, some of which are very small in number, two are significant. One are Shapsugs, mostly living outside of Adygea proper. Their main demand is for the restoration of the Shapsug National District abolished in the 1920s and of traditional Shapsug town names altered by the Soviets. The other tribe is the Bzhedugs, living mostly around the city of Krasnodar in the most urbanized and westernized part of the area. Under the Soviets - and continuing into the present - almost all of the key governmental administration positions are held by Bzhedugs. Proliferation of this dominance entails a level of tribal (as opposed to ethnic) nepotism unknown in other parts of the Caucasus, creating significant cross-tribal envy. Finally, a certain Armenophobia has spread among Adygeans -- a relatively new development -- in the wake of a large influx of Armenian refugees from Azerbaijan, Abkhazia, Chechnya and other territories.
The important point to note for this territory is that to the extent that disputes have arisen they are not inherently ethnic, but rather are social and economic with an ethnic mark. In the early Soviet era they were practically nonexistent and they will probably disappear if and when the social and economic situation changes, when politically correct place names are restored, when a proper state of law is established, and when a market economic structure is fully institutionalized. Should there be no progress on these larger issues of the political and legal context, then these relatively superficial divisions may solidify into more long-term cleavages.
In the republic of Karachai-Cherkessia, about 40% of the population is ethnic Russian (mostly Cossacks), with another 35% being Turkic-speaking Karachais, and less than 10% Cherkessians. The Karachais were among the so-called "punished peoples" exiled to Central Asia in 1944 and only returned to the region in 1957. The trauma of unjustified repression remains with them. As a result, Cherkessians, although smaller in number, controlled many of the privileged positions in the old Soviet system. A Karachais nationalist movement ("Djamaghat") has been actively pushing for an autonomous Karachais province. Public support for this has waned, however, since higher Karachais birthrates look to push them above 50% of the population in a few years and give them the ability to exercise "Karachai power". This perspective frightens both Cherkessians and Russians, who are currently more allied than confronted.
Ethnic divisions are suppressed, however, as a result of cross-cutting cleavages within ethnic groups in Karachai-Cherkessia. Among the Karachais, the pre-revolution social classes included Bii (barons), Uzden (yeomen) and Kul (serfs). The Bolshevik Revolution led to the extermination or exile of the Biis, the dispossession of the Uzden, and the usurpation of power by Kuls. Despite representing only 40% of Karachais today, Kuls continue to hold most important social and political positions. In many respects, the Uzden-Kul cleavage is deeper and more intractable than cross-ethnic divisions in the province. Similarly, the majority of ethnic Russians are Cossacks, who tend to pursue their own distinct social interests, often in conflict with non-Cossack Russians. By not delving beneath the surface, observers of these various intraethnic conflicts tend to regard them as ethnic conflicts.
To the east of Karachai-Cherkessia is the Republic of Kabardin-Balkaria. In August 1999, after long disputes and rallies of protest, the Supreme Court of the Karachai-Cherkessian Republic recognized General V. Semenov (a Karachai) as the legally elected President of the Republic. The supporters of his rival, S. Deres (a Cherkessian) who constitute only 20 percent of the votes, are protesting against this decision and now demand a secession of the Cherkessian-populated North from the Karachai-populated South. Again, this i s not so much an ethnic conflict, but rather a desire to keep in the North all revenues from the highly profitable alcohol industry, largely controlled by S. Derev. Its population of one million is roughly 50% Kabardins, 30% Russian, and less than 10% Balkars, with the remainder a mix of various groups. Kabardins are the same detribalized Adyghe as Cherkessians, yet "Greater Adygea" movements have found little support within the republic. The popular president of the Republic, Kokov, is a former Communist functionary valued for his skill in maintaining social peace and gaining economic benefits from Moscow. The vast majority of Russians in the region are recent emigrants, attracted during the Communist era by plentiful jobs, less competitive education and a pleasant climate. Relations between ethnic Kabardins and Russians of long residence are generally friendly. Although new Russian emigres sometimes create tensions, the economic attractions of the region have largely vanished, limiting further Russian immigration.
Relations between Balkars is more problematic. Balkars were also exiled to Central Asia from 1944-57, although most returned after 1957 and were settled in territories that stretched beyond their original tribal homelands. In day-to-day interaction, relations between Balkars and Kabardins are rather friendly. There are numerous mixed marriages, people get along well in the workplace, and there are many villages with mixed populations. Yet Balkars complain about the social and political domination of Kabardins and the barriers to Balkar advancement indicated by few Balkars in higher decision-making positions. This sense of grievances is reinforced by Kabardin stereotypes of Balkars as stubborn and stupid . On the other hand, the highland pasture lands owned by many Balkars have allowed for the extensive development of sheep and Angora goats, and the processing of wool and knitwear. The result is that Balkar income is about 10%-20% higher on average than Kabardin income.
There was a rather noisy Balkar nationalist movement headed by retired General Beppaev, who insisted on the creation of a new Balkarian state separate from Kabardinia. Beppaev and his followers organized a number of violent actions, which provoked some anxiety among Kabardins. For a period it appeared that the republic might be on the verge of mass violence. However, as a smartly organized referendum at the end of 1994 revealed, the total number of active supporters of Beppaev did not exceed 1,000. When President Kokov appointed Beppaev to an important position in the administration his followers stopped all protests.
Especially in Karachai-Cherkessia and Kabardin-Balkaria, the course of events in these territories demonstrate that, even in a multinational society where there are many prerequisites for ethnic tension, sober and balanced government leadership attempting to provide a decent niche for successful economic development may be able to prevent conflict. People who have some prospects of moderate economic prosperity are not willing to sacrifice that prosperity to the selfish interest of nationalist politicians. Only where the hope for economic success is frustrated can such politicians have any sort of success.
B. Ossetia, Ingushetia and Chechnya
To the east of Kabardin-Balkaria lies North Ossetia, the scene of some of the worst ethnic clashes in the northern Caucasus. Ethnic disputes in the region date back to the 1950s, when Chechens and Ingushes were repatriated to a newly reformed dual administrative region of Chechnya-Ingushetia. Unfortunately, a chunk of the Ingushes' traditional homeland was not included. Thousands of Ingushes nevertheless settled in this core of their ethnic territory, now the Prigorodnyi Raion of the North Ossetian ASSR, and attempted to maintain a power base grounded in customary law (adat), while the remaining Ossetians and Russian Cossacks used the legal basis of Soviet law as a thinly veiled policy of discrimination. There were numerous ethnic clashes in the region from the 1960s onward. Riots in the capital, Vladikavkaz, in 1981 were so severe that the army had to be called in -- although this was largely unknown to the outside world. Renewed conflict in 1992 saw the burning and plundering of Ingush property and the eviction of 60,000 Ingushes from North Ossetia. When combined with refugees from the Chechen War, over half of the current population of Ingushetia are refugees.
Ossetia as an ethnic territory consists of two parts: North Ossetia (or Ossetia-Alania), which is part of the Russian Federation, and South Ossetia, which is de jure part of Georgia but de facto an independent republic supported by Russian peacekeepers. South Ossetia has avoided any significant Russification or Georgification, maintaining a traditional cultural identity as well as an agriculture and cattle breeding economy. The territory is poor, but self-supporting. In contrast, North Ossetia is highly industrialized, urbanized, very significantly Russified, and the rural areas maintains Soviet-era forms of organization. Theoretically, Ossetians dream of reunification, but culturally northerners and southerners are very different and nurture many mutual prejudices.
Among all of the nations of the northern Caucasus, Ingushes and Chechens suffer from the most ethnic conflict. They feel a common cultural bond and only the prestige of Ingush President Ruslan Aushev has prevented Ingushes from large-scale participation in the Chechen War or retaliation against Ossetians. The history of the Chechen War of 1994-96 is well known, but ironically it is not significant to consideration of future ethnic relations. Chechens on the whole, as well as Ingushes, do not harbor an inherent hatred towards Russians. The countless anti-Russian actions that occurred from 1991 to 1994 were not motivated by inherent hatred, but rather resulted from a generally chaotic political and social period.
Of much more importance for both Ingushetia and Chechnya are the territories for economic development. Ingushetia has been declared an economic free zone. This helps to some extent, but their economic situation is particularly difficult: the territory is overcrowded with refugees for which the largely agricultural economy can provide few jobs. While it is too early to predict the economic future of Chechnya, it is likely to evolve as a dual economy -- urban areas will be reestablished as oil-based industrial economies while rural regions will remained laden with small-scale agriculture. Combined with the increasing influence of Islam, this will create serious social and cultural cleavages between the modern, industrial large cities and the tradition-oriented rural life of the southern highlands. That this split will largely correspond with teip (clan) differences indicates the crucial role of social stratification within Caucasian ethnic groups.
Thus in the area of the Central Caucasus, only Ingush-Ossetian relations display a deep mutual enmity. Peaceful coexistence, as such, may only be possible through strict separations of the two groups into their respective territories (although a return of part of the Prigorodnyi Raion and its resettlement by Ingushes is also a necessary prerequisite of any coexistence). In all other cases, differences between various segments of the same ethnic group may be more decisive.
C. Dagestan
The easternmost and largest republic in the north Caucasus is Dagestan, with more than 2 million people from nearly thirty aboriginal groups ranging in size from a mere 1,000 (Archins) to 700,000 (Avars), plus hundreds of thousands of Russians, Azeris, etc. Prior to Sovietization, the majority of these peoples lived as compact groups on their own territories in secluded mountain valleys. It was an ethnic mosaic, but largely an orderly one.
The Soviets changed this for the worse. Communist authorities exiled some groups and resettled others (e.g., Laks, Dargins, Didos) from the mountains to the lowlands. They also built the capital city (Makhachkala) in the heart of the ethnic territory of the Turkic speaking Kumyks, then offered thousands of other nationalities administrative and industrial jobs in the city, leaving
Kumyks feeling alienated in their own homeland. The net result is a multiplicity of claims and disputes across dozens of ethnic groups. Should ethnic violence ever flare in Dagestan, it will likely spread like wildfire. So far, however, the general realization of the explosive potential of ethnic conflict has served to keep it in check. In addition, power is still in the hands of former Communist functionaries who enjoy widespread popular support. Finally, the privatization of land in Dagestan, has proceeded quite peacefully, though it was an extraordinarily difficult task given the small amount of arable land relative to the number of potential claimants. Despite the difficulties created by Communism, it appears that the only viable social, political and economic system for the near future in industrial Dagestan is a quasi-Soviet system with Russian as the lingua franca. But local dialects and traditions will continue in the countryside.
Recently some ultra-Islamist Chechnian terrorists (sponsored by Osama bin-Laden and similar fanatics), with very little support of some young Dagestani religious radicals, tried to start an Islamic Fundametalist (Wahhabist) uprising against the traditional power. However, the majority of Dagestani population sided with the Russian troops in ousting the invaders back to the territory of Chechnya.
III. The Social and Economic Context of Caucasian Development
In recent years a there has developed in Russia an undisguised racist contempt and suspicion toward ethnic minorities, especially Caucasians. When moving to other parts of the Russian Federation, people from the Caucasus face discrimination in the workplace and harassment from police. The roots of this new xenophobia are beyond the scope of this paper, but it has contributed to certain trends among non-Russian minorities: to remain as much as possible within their own ethnic territory; to try to increase ethnic power and autonomy within those territories; to consolidate their economic and social position at the expense of the neighboring Russian population; and to resuscitate their traditional culture, native language and, in this case, the Islamic faith. All of this has contributed to dramatic social and economic changes in the northern Caucasus.
With the exception of the oil-based industrial infrastructure of Chechnya, much of which was damaged in the war, the economic base of the Caucasus is agricultural, particularly specialty products (tobacco, coriander, grapes for wine production, etc.). There is some small-scale industry, and tourism - which was heavily subsidized by the state - played a significant part during the Soviet era. All of these industries were manned mainly by Russian rather than native workers. Besides agriculture, all other industries are now in crisis. The general cash income of the region has markedly decreased, and stands at only around 50-60% of the Moscow average. The buying capacity of Russians has been particularly damaged, especially since, as urban dwellers primarily, their standard of living is not compensated by the home production of various foodstuffs.
The pace of social and economic change has varied from place to place and across ethnic groups. In Karachai-Cherkessia, Russians and Cherkessians tend to live in cities and in the lowlands, terrain of which is perfect for the development of orchards. Yet this requires extensive capital investment, which is lacking. As a result, the pace of privatization has been slow, Soviet-era modes of organization persist, and the revitalization of traditional cultures has not gained momentum. In contrast, Karachais reside in the highlands, terrain suitable for root vegetables and herding. Karachais have undertaken "wild privatization", staking out claims by fencing in particular parcels of land, without any firm legal basis. Since these lands often were ancestral plots swallowed by collectivization, it has provoked minimal conflict. It has also led to the revitalization of traditional social life built around clan gatherings and Islam. There has also been the development of some small-scale industry, notably beer brewing and trout farming, but this has been hindered by bureaucratic red tape, corruption and criminal syndicates. Success thus depends on formations of "protection rackets," both through criminal and (corrupt) official sources. This may lead to inter-ethnic or inter-strata enmity when the owners and racketeers (or bureaucrats) belong to different ethnic groups or different estates.
IV. Lessons for Avoiding Inter-Ethnic Conflict
From the above review of developments in the northern Caucasus, it is clear that very often the conflicts we see are not ethnic conflicts proper, but most often are ethnically disguised economic conflicts, triggered by the ongoing social and economic uncertainty, redistribution of property, struggle for key positions, etc. On the other hand, it is clear that in a region rife with ethnic friction, only two conflicts have led to bloodshed: the eviction of the Ingushes from North Ossetia and the Chechen War. It is obvious, then, that there are some mechanisms at work that either prevent or stifle ethnic strife.
The first, paradoxically, is that the continuity of power in the hands of former Communist Party functionaries helps to maintain social order. President Jarimov in Agydea, for example, was elected not as an Adygean leader, but as a former top personality of the local party leadership with sufficient experience, connections and conservative attitudes. Conflicts arise where former leaders are too weak to maintain power. Secondly, voluntary organizations may play an important role. Despite the disorder in Chechnya, there was a Council for Inter-Ethnic Reconciliation which managed to minimize the number of local conflicts. Islamic Sufi orders have also played a very positive role in Chechnya and Dagestan. Beyond this, the reconciling role of traditional village elders is also quite important. These mechanisms helped to prevent intensification of the Balkar-Kabardin conflict and hindered the mass participation of Ingushes on the Chechen side in the Chechnya War. Similarly, elderly Azeri women, acting in a traditional role, halted a crowd of Azeri youngsters when they tried to storm Stepanakert, the capital of Nagorno-Karabakh, after the February 1988 declaration of secession. Unfortunately, their efforts were annulled by the inflammatory rhetoric of the Azairbaidjan media. On the other hand, the existence of a large percentage of ethnically mixed marriages does not seem to help in conflict prevention. The percentage of such marriages was very high in Abkhazia and especially in Ossetia, but members of these families were regarded with mistrust by both sides.
Overall, one may assume that these mechanisms will be most effective in more traditionally oriented societies and economies. Unfortunately, in many societies in the northern Caucasus today, a large number of young men are growing up without exposure to or respect for traditional values. As such, there is a danger that new conflict is growing in the region. If there is to be any chance of avoiding this, it must be through economic development. The economic future of these areas lies not in industry or agriculture, but in reviving the tourist trade. The Caucasus region has a pleasant climate rich in natural beauty, plenty of historical relics, exotic customs, ancient architecture, etc - everything needed for a successful tourist industry. What it lacks is social stability. Tourism requires security, suppression of crime and terrorism, a decent and effective police force, and so on. Many Caucasians equate service jobs with servility, and are unwilling to work in the tourist trade. Equally, many ethnic Russians are reluctant to work for non-Russian bosses. Tourism is likely to be the future for the region, but for this industry to flourish, there must be significant changes in both social interaction and national mentalities.
Arutiunov, S.A., Narody I kul'tury: razvitie I vzaimodeistvie, Moscow, Nauka, 1989.
Arutiunov, S.A., Kavkazskaya likhoradka: diagnoz i lechenic," Itogi, No. 34, 1999.
Arutiunov, S.A., Zakony gor vne zakonov ravnin," Itogi, No. 3, 1999.
Gasanov, N.N., Zachevov, K. Ya., and Kazimov, A.K., "Mezhnatsional'noe soglasie v Dagestane: problemy i perspectivy," Polis, No. 2, 1993.
Kaltakhchian, A.C., "Reabilitatsiia repressirovannykh narodov: pervye shagi," Etnopolis, No. 2, 1992.
Mikhailov, V.A., "Printsip voronki ili mekhanizm razvertyvaniia mezhetnicheskogo konflikta," Sotsis, No. 5, 1993.
Skakunov, E.M., "Etnonatsional'nye konflikty I politicheskaia stabil'nost' Rossii," Etnopolis, No. 2, 1992.
Zolian, S.T., "Opisanie regional'nogo konflikta kak methodologicheskaia problema," Polis, No. 2, 1994.
Nalchik
The Circassian Genocide, by Antero Leitzinger
The Circassians: A Forgotten Genocide?, by Stephen D. Shenfield
Circassian Resistance to Russia, by Paul B. Henze
Papers respecting the Settlement of Circassian Emigrants in Turkey
Of Christianity, Enlightenment, and Colonialism: Russia in the North Caucasus, 1550-1800, by Michael Khodarkovsky
Defeat and Deportation, by Walter Richmond
Books & Documents in The US Library of Congress Archives
"The Emperor Carries a Gun": Capacity Building in the North Caucasus, by Katherine S. Layton
North Caucasus The Region, The Republics and The Peoples, by Helen Krag and Lars Funch
New Political Boundaries in the Caucasus, by W.E.D. Allen
The Caucasian Borderland, by W.E.D. Allen
The indigenous elites and the construction of ethnic identities in the North Caucasus, by Michael Khodarkovsky
Russia and the North Caucasus, by Marie B. Broxup
American Interest in the Caucasus, by Paul B. Henze
The North West Caucasus and Great Britain, by George Hewitt


text:
The 2000 Boston Red Sox season was the 100th season in the franchise's Major League Baseball history. The Red Sox finished second in the American League East with a record of 85 wins and 77 losses,  games behind the New York Yankees, who went on to win the 2000 World Series. The Red Sox did not qualify for the postseason, as the AL wild card went to the Seattle Mariners, who had finished second in the American League West with a record of 91–71.

Regular season
 Pedro Martínez became the first pitcher in Major League history to amass more than twice as many strikeouts (284) than hits allowed (128) in a season.

Season standings

Record vs. opponents

Transactions
 April 26, 2000: Curtis Pride was sent to the Boston Red Sox by the New York Mets as part of a conditional deal.
 June 5, 2000: Freddy Sanchez was drafted by the Boston Red Sox in the 11th round of the 2000 amateur draft. Player signed June 14, 2000.
 July 2, 2000: Hanley Ramirez was signed by the Boston Red Sox as an amateur free agent.
 July 8, 2000: Curtis Pride was released by the Boston Red Sox.
 August 3, 2000: Rico Brogna was selected off waivers by the Boston Red Sox from the Philadelphia Phillies.
 August 31, 2000: Dante Bichette was obtained by the Boston Red Sox from the Cincinnati Reds in exchange for Chris Reitsma and minor leaguer John Curtice.
 August 31, 2000: Midre Cummings was traded by the Minnesota Twins to the Boston Red Sox for Hector De Los Santos (minors).
 September 9, 2000: Lew Ford was traded by the Boston Red Sox to the Minnesota Twins for Hector Carrasco.

Opening Day Line Up

Roster

Player stats

Batting

Starters by position
Note: Pos = Position; G = Games played; AB = At bats; H = Hits; Avg. = Batting average; HR = Home runs; RBI = Runs batted in; SB = Stolen Bases

Other batters
Note: G = Games played; AB = At bats; H = Hits; Avg. = Batting average; HR = Home runs; RBI = Runs batted in; SB = Stolen bases

Pitching

Starting pitchers
Note: G = Games pitched; GS = Games started; IP = Innings pitched; W = Wins; L = Losses; SV = Saves; ERA = Earned run average; SO = Strikeouts

Relief pitchers
Note: G = Games pitched; IP = Innings pitched; W = Wins; L = Losses; SV = Saves; ERA = Earned run average; SO = Strikeouts

Other pitchers
Note: G = Games pitched; GS = Games started; IP = Innings pitched; W = Wins; L = Losses; SV = Saves; ERA = Earned run average

Game log

|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 1 || April 4 || @ Mariners  || 2–0 || P. Martínez (1–0) || Moyer (0–1) || Lowe (1) || Safeco Field || 45,552 || 1–0 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 2 || April 5 || @ Mariners  || 3–9 || García (1–0) || R. Martínez (0–1) || — || Safeco Field || 29,242  || 1–1 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 3 || April 6 || @ Mariners  || 2–5 || Mesa (1–0)  || Florie (0–1) || Sasaki (1) || Safeco Field || 25,121 || 1–2 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 4 || April 7 || @ Angels  || 3–7 || Dickson (1–0)  || Schourek (0–1)  || — || Edison Field || 30,412 || 1–3 || L3
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 5 || April 8 || @ Angels || 5–7 || Hill (1–1) || Rose (0–1) || Percival (1) || Edison Field || 27,369 || 1–4 || L4
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 6 || April 9 || @ Angels  || 5–2 || P. Martínez (2–0) || Bottenfield (0–1) || — || Edison Field || 38,847 || 2–4 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 7 || April 11 || Twins  || 13–5 || R. Martínez (1–1) || Mays (0–1) || — || Fenway Park || 33,114 || 3–4 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 8 || April 12 || Twins  || 7–3  || Fassero (1–0) || Santana (0–1) || — || Fenway Park || 20,313 || 4–4 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 9 || April 13 || Twins || 4–3 || Wakefield (1–0) || Wells (0–1) || Lowe (2) || Fenway Park || 22,194 || 5–4 || W4
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 10 || April 14 || Athletics || 3–2 || Appier (2–1) || Rose (0–2) || — || Fenway Park || 29,472 || 5–5 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 11 || April 15 || Athletics || 14–2 || P. Martínez (3–0) || Hudson (1–1) || — || Fenway Park || 33,122 || 6–4 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 12 || April 16 || Athletics || 5–4 || Lowe (1–0) || Mathews (0–1) || — || Fenway Park || 32,385 || 7–5 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 13 || April 17 || Athletics || 0–1 || Heredia (1–1) || Fassero (1–1) || Isringhausen (2) || Fenway Park || 33,240 || 7–6 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 14 || April 18 || @ Tigers || 7–0 || Schourek (1–1) || Mlicki (0–3) || Lowe (3) || Comerica Park || 21,632 || 8–6 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 15 || April 19 || @ Tigers || 10–0 || Rose (1–2) || Nomo (1–1) || — || Comerica Park || 20,526 || 9–6 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bbb"
| — || April 20 || @ Tigers  || colspan=8|Postponed (rain). Makeup date September 16.
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bbb"
| — || April 21 || Indians  || colspan=8|Postponed (rain). Makeup date June 8.
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bbb"
| — || April 22 || Indians  || colspan=8|Postponed (rain). Makeup date September 20.
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bbb"
| — || April 23 || Indians  || colspan=8|Postponed (rain). Makeup date September 21.
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 16 || April 24 || @ Rangers || 4–5 || Rogers (2–3) || Wakefield (1–1) || Wetteland (2) || The Ballpark at Arlington || 26,940 || 9–7 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 17 || April 25 || @ Rangers || 6–3 || P. Martínez (4–0) || Helling (2–1) || Lowe (4) || The Ballpark at Arlington || 31,692 || 10–7 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 18 || April 26 || @ Rangers || 14–4 || Fassero (2–1) || Clark (2–2) || — || The Ballpark at Arlington || 28,698 || 11–7 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 19 || April 28 || @ Indians || 3–4 || Burba (3–1) || Schourek (1–2) || Karsay (3) || Jacobs Field || 42,885 || 11–8 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 20 || April 29 || @ Indians  || 2–3 || Finley (3–0) || R. Martínez (1–2) || Karsay (4) || Jacobs Field || 42,453 || 11–9 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 21 || April 30 || @ Indians || 2–1 || P. Martínez (5–0) || Nagy (1–4) || Lowe (5) || Jacobs Field || 42,065 || 12–9 || W1
|-

|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 22 || May 1 || Tigers || 10–6 || Fassero (3–1) || Nitkowski (1–5) || — || Fenway Park || 24,087 || 13–9 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 23 || May 2 || Tigers || 7–6 (12)|| Blair (0–1) || Wakefield (1–2) || Jones (5) || Fenway Park || 22,857 || 13–10 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 24 || May 3 || Tigers || 4–2 || Lowe (2–0) || Weaver (0–4) || — || Fenway Park || 27,397 || 14–10 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 25 || May 5 || Devil Rays || 5–3 || R. Martínez (2–2) || Eiland (1–1) || Lowe (6) || Fenway Park || 32,479 || 15–10 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 26 || May 6 || Devil Rays || 0–1 || Trachsel (2–2) || P. Martínez (5–1) || — || Fenway Park || 32,497 || 15–11 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 27 || May 7 || Devil Rays || 9–7 || Fassero (4–1) || Rekar (0–1) || Lowe (7) || Fenway Park || 32,336 || 16–11 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 28 || May 8 || White Sox || 3–2 || Rose (2–2) || Sturtze (1–2) || Lowe (8) || Fenway Park || 23,468 || 17–11 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 29 || May 9 || White Sox || 0–6 || Baldwin (6–0) || Schourek (1–3) || — || Fenway Park || 25,371 || 17–12 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 30 || May 10 || White Sox || 5–3 (6)|| R. Martínez (3–2) || Eldred (2–2) || Garcés (1) || Fenway Park || 28,911 || 18–12 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 31 || May 11 || @ Orioles || 11–4 || Cormier (1–0) || Mercedes (2–2) || — || Camden Yards || 43,619 || 19–12 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 32 || May 12 || @ Orioles || 9–0 ||P. Martínez (6–1) || Ponson (2–2) || — || Camden Yards || 48,354 || 20–12 || W3
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 33 || May 13 || @ Orioles || 5–1 || Garcés (1–0) || Trombley (2–2) || — || Camden Yards || 48,579 || 21–12 || W4
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 34 || May 14 || @ Orioles || 10–1 || Rose (3–2) || Mussina (1–5) || — || Camden Yards || 46,107 || 22–12 || W5
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 35 || May 15 || @ Blue Jays || 8–1 || Schourek (2–3) || Castillo (1–3) || — || SkyDome || 16,124 || 23–12 || W6
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 36 || May 16 || @ Blue Jays || 6–7 || Munro (1–0) || Lowe (2–1) || — || SkyDome || 17,663 || 23–13 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 37 || May 17 || @ Blue Jays || 8–0 || P. Martínez (7–1) || Carpenter (3–5) || — || SkyDome || 20,078 || 24–13 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 38 || May 19 || Tigers || 3–0 || Fassero (5–1) || Moehler (1–2) || Lowe (9) || Fenway Park || 31,973 || 25–13 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 39 || May 20 || Tigers || 1–2 || Mlicki (2–5) || Wakefield (1–3) || Jones (11) || Fenway Park || 31,909 || 25–14 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 40 || May 21 || Tigers || 5–7 || Nomo (2–3) || R. Martínez (3–3) || Jones (12) || Fenway Park || 31,893 || 25–15 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 41 || May 23 || Blue Jays || 2–3 || Carpenter (4–5) || P. Martínez (7–2) || Koch (10) || Fenway Park || 33,402 || 25–16 || L3
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 42 || May 24 || Blue Jays || 6–3 (11)|| Cormier (2–0) || Frascatore (0–1) || — || Fenway Park || 31,250 || 26–16 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 43 || May 25 || Blue Jays || 6–11 || Wells (8–2) || Schourek (2–4) || — || Fenway Park || 32,716 || 26–17 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 44 || May 26 || @ Yankees || 4–1 || R. Martínez (4–3) || Cone (1–4) || Lowe (10) || Yankee Stadium || 54,470 || 27–17 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 45 || May 27 || @ Yankees || 3–8 || Stanton (1–0) || Wasdin (0–1) || — || Yankee Stadium || 55,671 || 27–18 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 46 || May 28 ||  @ Yankees || 2–0 || P. Martínez (8–2) || Clemens (4–5) || — || Yankee Stadium || 55,339 || 28–18 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 47 || May 30 || Royals || 8–2 || Fassero (6–1) || Suppan (2–5) || — || Fenway Park || 31,861 || 29–18 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 48 || May 31 || Royals || 7–9 || Suzuki (2–0) || Schourek (2–5) || Spradlin (5) || Fenway Park || 32,503 || 29–19 || L1
|-

|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 49 || June 1 || Royals || 11–13 || Santiago (5–2) || Lowe (2–2) || Reichert (1) || Fenway Park || 32,661 || 29–20 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 50 || June 2 || @ Phillies || 1–2 (11)|| Brantley (1–0) || Wasdin (0–2) || — || Veterans Stadium || 22,194 || 29–21 || L3
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 51 || June 3 || @ Phillies || 3–9 || Wolf (5–4) || Wakefield (1–4) || — || Veterans Stadium || 31,131 || 29–22 || L4
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 52 || June 4 || @ Phillies || 5–6 (12)|| Schrenk (2–1) || Cormier (2–1) || — || Veterans Stadium || 27,382 || 29–23 || L5
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 53 || June 5 || @ Marlins || 3–2 || Wakefield (2–4) || Bones (1–1) || Lowe (11) || Pro Player Stadium || 12,523 || 30–23 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 54 || June 6 || @ Marlins || 4–3 || R. Martínez (5–3) || Sánchez (4–5) || Lowe (12) || Pro Player Stadium || 14,225 || 31–23 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 55 || June 7 ||  @ Marlins || 2–6 || Darensbourg (2–0) || Rose (3–3) || — || Pro Player Stadium || 17,088 || 31–24 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 56 || June 8 || Indians || 3–0 || P. Martínez (9–2) || Colón (6–3) || Lowe (13) || Fenway Park || 31,438 || 32–24 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 57 || June 9 || @ Braves || 4–6 || Maddux (8–1) || Fassero (6–2) || Seánez (2) || Turner Field || 48,053 || 32–25 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 58 || June 10 || @ Braves || 0–6 || Mulholland (6–5) || Schourek (2–6) || — || Turner Field || 49,420 || 32–26 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 59 || June 11 || @ Braves || 5–3 || Garcés (2–0) || Seánez (2–4) || Lowe (14) || Turner Field || 47,437 || 33–26 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bbb"
| — || June 12 || @ Yankees  || colspan=8|Postponed (rain). Makeup date September 11.
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 60 || June 13 || @ Yankees || 5–3 || Pichardo (1–0) || Hernández (6–5) || Lowe (15) || Yankee Stadium || 52,142 || 34–26 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 61 || June 14 ||  @ Yankees || 1–2 || Grimsley (3–1) || Wakefield (2–5) || Rivera (15) || Yankee Stadium || 54,834 || 34–27 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 62 || June 16 || Blue Jays || 7–4 || Pichardo (2–0) || Escobar (5–8) || Lowe (16) || Fenway Park || 33,638 || 35–27 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 63 || June 17 || Blue Jays || 10–11 || Wells (11–2) || R. Martínez (5–4) || Koch (14) || Fenway Park || 32,951 || 35–28 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 64 || June 18 ||Blue Jays || 1–5 || Castillo (3–5) || Fassero (6–3) || Koch (15) || Fenway Park || 32,925 || 35–29 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 65 || June 19 || Yankees || 22–1 || Mendoza (6–3) || Rose (3–4) || — || Fenway Park || 33,370 || 35–30 || L3
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 66 || June 20 || Yankees || 3–0 || Pettitte (7–3) || P. Martínez (9–3) || Rivera (16) || Fenway Park || 33,909 || 35–31 || L4
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 67 || June 21 || Yankees || 9–7 || Garcés (3–0) || Grimsley (3–2) || — || Fenway Park || 32,958 || 36–31 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 68 || June 22 || Yankees || 4–2 || R. Martínez (6–4) || Westbrook (0–2) || Lowe (17) || Fenway Park || 33,774 || 37–31 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 69 || June 23 || @ Blue Jays || 4–5 || Castillo (4–5) || Wasdin (0–3) || Koch (16) || SkyDome || 28,198 || 37–32 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 70 || June 24 || @ Blue Jays || 4–6 || Halladay (3–4) || Rose (3–5) || Koch (17) || SkyDome || 30,130 || 37–33 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 71 || June 25 || @ Blue Jays || 5–6 (13)|| DeWitt (1–0) || Florie (0–2) || — || SkyDome || 31,022 || 37–34 || L3
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 72 || June 27 || Orioles || 3–6 (10)|| Trombley (3–2) || Lowe (2–3) || — || Fenway Park || 32,813 || 37–35 || L4
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 73 || June 28 || Orioles || 7–8 (11)|| Mercedes (3–3) || Florie (0–3) || Groom (4) || Fenway Park || 33,834 || 37–36 || L5
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 74 || June 29 || Orioles || 12–4 || Wakefield (3–5) || Erickson (3–6) || — || Fenway Park || 33,612 || 38–36 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 75 || June 30 || @ White Sox || 4–10 || Parque (8–2) || Pichardo (2–1) || — || Comiskey Park || 32,157 || 38–37 || L1
|-

|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 76 || July 1 || @ White Sox || 2–7 || Sirotka (8–6) || Crawford (0–1) || — || Comiskey Park || 28,006 || 38–38 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 77 || July 2 || @ White Sox || 2–8 || Baldwin (11–3) || Schourek (2–7) || — || Comiskey Park || 32,934 || 38–39 || L3
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 78 || July 3 || @ Twins  || 11–8 || Pichardo (3–1) || Lincoln (0–2) || Lowe (18) || Metrodome || 13,128 || 39–39 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 79 || July 4 || @ Twins  || 14–4 || Wakefield (4–5) || Milton (8–3) || Florie (1) || Metrodome || 9,209 || 40–39 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 80 || July 5 || @ Twins || 11–8 || Wasdin (1–3) || Redman (5–4) || Lowe (19) || Metrodome || 8,488 || 41–39 || W3
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 81 || July 6 || @ Twins  || 8–7 || Crawford (1–1) || Radke (5–10) || — || Metrodome || 10,326 || 42–39 || W4
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 82 || July 7 || Braves || 3–5 || Glavine (9–5) || Schourek (2–8) || Ligtenberg (7) || Fenway Park || 33,686 || 42–40 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 83 || July 8 || Braves || 1–5 || Mulholland (9–8) || R. Martínez (6–5) || — || Fenway Park || 33,311 || 42–41 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 84 || July 9 || Braves || 7–2 || Wakefield (5–5) || Millwood (5–8) || — || Fenway Park || 33,018 || 43–41 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 85 || July 13 || Mets || 4–3 || Garcés (4–0) || Benítez (2–4) || — || Fenway Park || 33,894 || 44–41 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 86 || July 14 || Mets  || 4–6 || Mahomes (3–1) || Lowe (2–4) || Benítez (20) || Fenway Park || 33,293 || 44–42 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 87 || July 15 || Mets || 6–4 || R. Martínez (7–5) || Hampton (9–6) || Lowe (20) || Fenway Park || 33,213 || 45–42 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 88 || July 16 || Expos || 5–2 || Wakefield (6–5) || Johnson (4–4) || Wasdin (1) || Fenway Park || 32,164 || 46–42 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 89 || July 17 || Expos || 7–3 || Pichardo (4–1) || Telford (5–4) || — || Fenway Park || 32,703 || 47–42 || W3
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 90 || July 18 || Expos || 3–1 || P. Martínez (10–3) || Vázquez (7–5) || Lowe (21) || Fenway Park || 32,329 || 48–42 || W4
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bbb"
| — || July 19 || @ Orioles  || colspan=8|Postponed (rain). Makeup date July 20.
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 91 || July 20 (1)|| @ Orioles || 11–7 || R. Martínez (8–5) || Ponson (5–6) || — || Camden Yards || 42,048 || 49–42 || W5
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 92 || July 20 (2)|| @ Orioles || 4–9 || Erickson (5–7) || Schourek (2–9) || — || Camden Yards || 46,167 || 49–43 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 93 || July 21 || White Sox || 5–8 || Simas (2–2) || Pichardo (4–2) || Howry (5) || Fenway Park || 33,869 || 49–44 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 94 || July 22 || White Sox || 8–6 || Fassero (7–3) || Garland (1–2) || — || Fenway Park || 33,384 || 50–44 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 95 || July 23 || White Sox || 1–0 || P. Martínez (11–3) || Sirotka (9–8) || — || Fenway Park || 33,224 || 51–44 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 96 || July 24 || Twins || 2–4 || Milton (9–6) || Ohka (0–1) || — || Fenway Park || 33,469 || 51–45 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 97 || July 25 || Twins || 2–4 || Mays (6–11) || R. Martínez (8–6) || Guardado (6) || Fenway Park || 33,668 || 51–46 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bbb"
| — || July 26 || Twins  || colspan=8|Postponed (rain). Makeup date September 7.
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 98 || July 27 || @ Athletics || 5–4 (10)|| Garcés (5–0) || Tam (3–3) || Lowe (22) || Network Associates Coliseum || 19,343 || 52–46 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 99 || July 28 || @ Athletics || 4–1 || P. Martínez (12–3) || Mulder (6–7) || Lowe (23) || Network Associates Coliseum || 28,072 || 53–46 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 100 || July 29 || @ Athletics || 1–12 || Appier (9–8) || Fassero (7–4) || — || Network Associates Coliseum || 36,325 || 53–47 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 101 || July 30 || @ Athletics || 2–5 || Heredia (13–7) || Arrojo (5–10) || Isringhausen (23) || Network Associates Coliseum || 29,847 || 53–48 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 102 || July 31 || @ Mariners || 8–5 || Garcés (6–0) || Mesa (3–6) || Pichardo (1) || Safeco Field || 36,993 || 54–48 || W1
|-

|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 103 || August 1 || @ Mariners || 4–5 (19)|| Sasaki (2–5) || Fassero (7–5) || — || Safeco Field || 37,391 || 54–49 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 104 || August 2 || @ Mariners || 5–2 || P. Martínez (13–3) || García (3–2) || — || Safeco Field || 45,121 || 55–49 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 105 || August 4 || Royals || 5–4 || Garcés (7–0) || Larkin (0–1) || Lowe (24) || Fenway Park || 33,702 || 56–49 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 106 || August 5 || Royals || 5–7 || Meadows (8–8) || Cormier (2–2) || Bottalico (10) || Fenway Park || 31,441 || 56–50 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 107 || August 6 || Royals || 1–3 || Reichert (5–6) || Wakefield (6–6) || Bottalico (11) || Fenway Park || 33,442 || 56–51 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 108 || August 7 || @ Angels || 1–4 || Washburn (7–2) || Ohka (0–2) || Hasegawa (4) || Edison Field || 23,078 || 56–52 || L3
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 109 || August 8 || @ Angels || 1–2 || Ortiz (4–2) || P. Martínez (13–4) || — || Edison Field || 27,293 || 56–53 || L4
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 110 || August 9 || @ Angels || 4–2 || Fassero (8–5) || Wise (0–1) || Lowe (25) || Edison Field || 25,334 || 57–53 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 111 || August 11 || @ Rangers || 7–3 || Arrojo (6–10) || Glynn (3–2) || — || The Ballpark at Arlington || 39,991 || 58–53 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 112 || August 12 || @ Rangers || 3–6 || Helling (14–8) || Wakefield (6–7) || — || The Ballpark at Arlington || 43,822 || 58–54 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 113 || August 13 || @ Rangers || 4–2 || Ohka (1–2) || Rogers (11–10) || Lowe (26) || The Ballpark at Arlington || 28,927 || 59–54 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 114 || August 14 || Devil Rays || 7–3 || Lowe (3–4) || Taylor (1–2) || — || Fenway Park || 32,174 || 60–54 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 115 || August 15 || Devil Rays || 1–3 || Sturtze (4–2) || Fassero (8–6) || Hernández (22) || Fenway Park || 33,015 || 60–55 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 116 || August 16 || Devil Rays || 4–3 || Arrojo (7–10) || Wilson (0–2) || Lowe (27) || Fenway Park || 31,467 || 61–55 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 117 || August 17 || Rangers || 8–7 || Garcés (8–0) || Wetteland (4–5) || — || Fenway Park || 33,510 || 62–55 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 118 || August 18 || Rangers || 6–4 || Ohka (2–2) || Rogers (11–11) || Lowe (28) || Fenway Park || 33,009 || 63–55 || W3
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 119 || August 19 || Rangers || 9–0 || P. Martínez (14–4) || Perisho (2–6) || — || Fenway Park || 33,222 || 64–55 || W4
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 120 || August 20 || Rangers || 2–6 || Davis (5–4) || Fassero (8–7) || — || Fenway Park || 32,467 || 64–56 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 121 || August 21 || Angels || 7–6 (11)|| Lowe (4–4) || Holtz (1–3) || — || Fenway Park || 32,795 || 65–56 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 122 || August 22 || Angels || 4–11 || Mercker (1–2) || Wakefield (6–8) || — || Fenway Park || 33,163 || 65–57 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 123 || August 23 || Angels || 3–1 || Ohka (3–2) || Ortiz (4–4) || Lowe (29) || Fenway Park || 32,958 || 66–57 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 124 || August 24 || @ Royals || 9–7 (10)|| Pichardo (5–2) || Larkin (0–2) || Lowe (30) || Kauffman Stadium || 18,928 || 67–57 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 125 || August 25 ||  @ Royals || 2–6 || Suppan (7–7) || Florie (0–4) || — || Kauffman Stadium || 20,028 || 67–58 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 126 || August 26 || @ Royals || 5–3 || Arrojo (8–10) || Meadows (9–10) || Lowe (31) || Kauffman Stadium || 30,199 || 68–58 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 127 || August 27 || @ Royals || 7–11 || Reichert (8–6) || Wakefield (6–9) || — || Kauffman Stadium || 17,037 || 68–59 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 128 || August 28 || @ Devil Rays || 2–5 || Rekar (5–9) || Pichardo (5–3) || Hernández (26) || Tropicana Field || 17,721 || 68–60 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 129 || August 29 || @ Devil Rays || 8–0 || P. Martínez (15–4) || Eiland (2–2) || — || Tropicana Field || 17,450 || 69–60 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 130 || August 30 || @ Devil Rays || 1–3 || Lopez (11–9) || Fassero (8–8) || Hernández (27) || Tropicana Field || 15,043 || 69–61 || L1
|-

|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 131 || September 1 || Mariners || 6–2 || Arrojo (9–10) || Halama (11–7) || — || Fenway Park || 33,021 || 70–61 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 132 || September 2 || Mariners || 1–4 || García (5–4) || Garcés (8–1) || Sasaki (31) || Fenway Park || 31,830 || 70–62 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 133 || September 3 || Mariners || 0–5 || Abbott (9–5) || Ohka (3–3) || Paniagua (4) || Fenway Park || 32,668 || 70–63 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 134 || September 4 || Mariners || 5–1 || P. Martínez (16–4) || Moyer (11–9) || — || Fenway Park || 32,619 || 71–63 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 135 || September 5 || Athletics || 10–3 || Schourek (3–9) || Appier (12–11) || — || Fenway Park || 31,825 || 72–63 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 136 || September 6 || Athletics || 4–6 || Mulder (8–10) || Arrojo (9–11) || Mecir (5) || Fenway Park || 31,262 || 72–64 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 137 || September 7 || Twins || 11–6 || R. Martínez (9–6) || Milton (12–9) || — || Fenway Park || 32,283 || 73–64 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 138 || September 8 || Yankees || 0–4 || Clemens (12–6) || Ohka (3–4) || — || Fenway Park || 33,861 || 73–65 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 139 || September 9 || Yankees || 3–5 || Pettitte (18–7) || P. Martínez (16–5) || — || Fenway Park || 33,355 || 73–66 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 140 || September 10 || Yankees || 2–6 || Keisler (1–0) || Schourek (3–10) || Gooden (2) || Fenway Park || 33,062 || 73–67 || L3
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 141 || September 11 || @ Yankees || 4–0 || Arrojo (10–11) || Hernández (11–11) || Lowe (32) || Yankee Stadium || 40,326 || 74–67 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 142 || September 12 || @ Indians || 8–6 || R. Martínez (10–6) || Finley (12–11) || Lowe (33) || Jacobs Field || 42,714 || 75–67 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 143 || September 13 || @ Indians || 3–10 || Colón (13–8) || Ohka (3–5) || — || Jacobs Field || 42,667 || 75–68 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 144 || September 14 || @ Indians  || 7–4 || P. Martínez (17–5) || Nagy (2–5) || Lowe (34) || Jacobs Field || 42,709 || 76–68 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 145 || September 15 || @ Tigers  || 7–6 || Beck (1–0) || Cruz (5–2) || Lowe (35) || Comerica Park || 33,785 || 77–68 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 146 || September 16 (1) || @ Tigers || 8–5 || Pichardo (6–3) || Anderson (3–2) || Lowe (36) || Comerica Park || 32,882 || 78–68 || W3
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 147 || September 16 (2)|| @ Tigers || 2–12 || Nomo (7–11) || Ontiveros (0–1) || — || Comerica Park || 24,216 || 78–69 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 148 || September 17 || @ Tigers  || 4–5 || Mlicki (6–11) || R. Martínez (10–7)  || Jones (39) || Comerica Park || 33,174 || 78–70 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb;"
| 149 || September 19 || Indians  || 7–4 || Beck (2–0) || Nagy (2–6) || Lowe (37) || Fenway Park || 32,512 || 79–70 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb;"
| 150 || September 20 (1) || Indians  || 1–2 || Woodard (3–10) || P. Martínez (17–6) || Wickman (27) || Fenway Park || 33,002 || 79–71 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 151 || September 20 (2)|| Indians || 4–5 || Karsay (5–8) || Cormier (2–3) || Wickman (28) || Fenway Park || 32,751 || 79–72 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 152 || September 21 (1)|| Indians || 9–8 || Ontiveros (1–1) || Speier (4–2) || Lowe (38) || Fenway Park || 31,404 || 80–72 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 153 || September 21 (2)|| Indians || 5–8 || Finley (14–11) || Wakefield (6–10) || — || Fenway Park || 32,743 || 80–73 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 154 || September 22 || Orioles || 1–3 || Ponson (9–12) || R. Martínez (10–8) || — || Fenway Park || 32,708 || 80–74 || L2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 155 || September 23 || Orioles || 8–7 (10)|| Carrasco (5–3) || Kohlmeier (0–1) || — || Fenway Park || 32,273 || 81–74 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 156 || September 24 || Orioles || 0–1 || Mussina (10–15) || Ohka (3–6) || Kohlmeier (12) || Fenway Park || 32,183 || 81–75 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 157 || September 26 || @ White Sox || 4–3 || P. Martínez (18–6) || Beirne (1–3) || Lowe (39) || Comiskey Park || 23,139 || 82–75 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 158 || September 27 || @ White Sox || 2–1 || Crawford (2–1) || Baldwin (14–6) || Lowe (40) || Comiskey Park || 16,368 || 83–75 || W2
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 159 || September 28 || @ White Sox || 7–6 || Beck (3–0) || Simas (2–3) || Lowe (41) || Comiskey Park || 18,326 || 84–75 || W3
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 160 || September 29 || @ Devil Rays || 6–8 || Yan (7–8) || Carrasco (5–4) || Hernández (32) || Tropicana Field || 18,290 || 84–76 || L1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#bfb"
| 161 || September 30 || @ Devil Rays || 4–2 || Cormier (3–3) || Hernández (4–7) || Lowe (42) || Tropicana Field || 23,447 || 85–76 || W1
|- style="text-align:center; background-color:#fbb"
| 162 ||October 1 || @ Devil Rays || 2–3 (10)|| Wheeler (1–1) || Croushore (2–1) || — || Tropicana Field || 28,043 || 85–77 || L1
|-

|Reference:

Awards and honors
Awards
 Pedro Martínez – AL Pitcher of the Month (April)

Accomplishments
 Pedro Martínez – Lowest WHIP, (0.74)

All-Star Game
 Carl Everett, reserve OF
 Nomar Garciaparra, reserve SS
 Derek Lowe, reserve P
 Pedro Martínez, reserve P (did not attend)

Farm system

In addition to the DSL Red Sox, the team shared a DSL team with the Arizona Diamondbacks.

VSL cooperative was with the Milwaukee Brewers and Minnesota Twins.

Source:

References

External links
 2000 Boston Red Sox team page at Baseball Reference
 2000 Boston Red Sox season at baseball-almanac.com
 2000 Boston Red Sox Draft Selections

Boston Red Sox seasons
Boston Red Sox
Boston Red Sox
Red Sox

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


"We do not so much long to know the meaning of life as we long to feel alive and to have an experience of ourselves in it." (Joseph Campbell).
How many of us feel the rapture of being alive? We all crave it yet do we seize life in a way that cultivates vitality? We all simply want to be moved, yet do we live our lives in ways that allow us to be touched and moved? Without movement there is stagnation, illness and disinterest. To be moved, we require a vehicle.
• Takes us on a tour of myth, the myths that shape our lives as well as the myth we tell ourselves about who we are.
• Brings us to look at the many vehicles of transformation available in the world today.
• Highlights what is common among vehicles of transformation and what needs to be present when engaging a vehicle of transformation in order to be moved most effectively.
• Comments on the make-up of every human being at any given moment and points out that the conglomerate of who we are is no more than the conglomerate of every relationship we have with all people, places and things.
• Comments on what we have in our lives and why we have it and on what we want for our lives and why we don't have it.
• Suggests that bridging the gap between what we have and what we want is a matter of engaging a vehicle of transformation where the focus is on the common threads among vehicles.
By the end of the book, we are given a fresh way of looking at our existence in the world and a guide for starting the journey toward self cultivation. For those already on a path of self development, it offers food for thought that might help us reorient to a healthier and more fulfilling relationship with ourselves and our developmental practices.
Call 1-888-247-2140 or contact us via email to order.


text:
Кубок Азії 1960 - футбольний турнір серед азійських збірних. Це другий Кубок Азії. Фінальний етап проходив в Південній Кореї з 14 по 21 жовтня 1960 року. Вигравши всі свої матчі, Кубок завоювала збірна-господарка турніру - Південна Корея.

Кваліфікація

Західна зона

Усі матчі західної зони кваліфікації проходили на Махараджа Коледж Стедіум у Ернакуламі, що в Індії

Центральна зона
Усі матчі центральної зони кваліфікації проходили у Сінгапурі

Східна зона

Усі матчі східної зони кваліфікації проходили на Філіппінах

Фінальний турнір

Усі матчі фінального турніру проходили на Донгдаемун Стедіум у Сеулі, що в Південній Кореї

Переможець

Посилання
 Деталі кубку на сайті RSSSF

Кубок Азії з футболу 1960
1960 у футболі
Жовтень 1960


We welcome your letters and opinions. Kindly limit your letters to a page, preferably typewritten and doublespaced. However, for your letters to be considered for publication, it is essential that all letters must be SIGNED above your PRINTED NAME (you may request your name to be withheld or substituted with your pen name) and must include your ADDRESS and PHONE NUMBER. Letters and emails deficient in any of the above requisites will not be entertained. Please be guided accordingly. Thank you.
An assembly meeting of public utility vehicles' operators and other transport stakeholders from Region 1, Region 2 and Cordillera was hurriedly called on Jan. 27 by the Office of Senator Grace Poe through the local government of Baguio which was held at the latter's multipurpose hall.
During the meeting presided by one Ariel Lim who appeared as the chief of the staff sent by Sen. Poe, it was learned from him that the reason for the assembly was to consult and ask the PUV operators, drivers, and concerned public about their position and where they stand on the PUV Modernization Program of government, as mandated in Department Order 2017-011.
According to Lim, these consultations are necessary to enable the staff to formulate a committee report as a recommendation for the review of DOTr's DO 2017-011 otherwise known as the Omnibus Franchising Guidelines or OFG.
In my view, these consultations being made in many regions of the country are rather too late now. The Senate or Congress should have done this a long time ago upon the signing and promulgation by Transportations Sec. Arthur Tugade of the said department order. For even a mere casual reading of the OFG, it should be gleaned that its provisions are clearly unreasonable, arbitrary and anti-poor.
Truth to tell, the Alliance of Jeepney Operators and Drivers Associations in BLISTT, Inc. (AJODABI)) has submitted a position paper in April 2017 requesting Tugade to review the provisions of Dept Order 2017-011 even before the floated final draft was approved on June 19, 2017 for the reason that it was arbitrary and unreasonable. Hence, as a promulgated rule, we believe the same is invalid.
For one, there was no study or researches made on the transport conditions obtaining in the Cordillera, nor was there a consultation made among the affected transport operators, drivers and the riding public in the region, in pursuance to due process of law.
Later, the alliance also submitted another position paper to the Office of Sen. Poe through Baguio Rep. Mark Go requesting for a review by the Senate or Congress of the issued department order and recommending proposals how the modernization of PUJs will suit and apply to the situations in Baguio City and the rest of the Cordillera. Unfortunately, the position paper was not even acknowledged, much more replied.
By this time, DOTr may no longer be persuaded to amend, modify or to suspend the implementation of the department order of which rules the DOTr has power to promulgate based on existing laws. To stall or stop the implementation of the department order and its already issued implementing rules, only a petition for injunction filed with the courts will enjoin DOTr and Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board from enforcing the same.
Briefly said, these consultations being done now by the staff of Sen. Poe are exercises in futility. It will do good, therefore, to join and support the action for injunction with prayer for restraining order contemplated to be filed by concerned transport sectors in Baguio City.
Instead of enacting bills that would uplift the desperate lives of Filipinos, Congress rushed to amend a law reducing the minimum age of criminal liability from 15 to a threshold of 12 years old, as if it is an urgent concern, without scientific basis.
Have you ever tried to define a word by using the same word to describe it? It does not work. I cannot explain a term or word by comparing it with itself. For examples: You cannot say, "Being proud is to be filled with pride."
The front page photos of Kennon Road published in the Jan. 27 issue of the Courier seems to me a bit puzzling on why three sections of the road caved in.


text:
The Doctrine of Chances (1754)
(updated November 17, 2011, February 21, 2013)
In his treatises on whist, backgammon, piquet, quadrille, and brag, Hoyle had briefly discussed the mathematical aspects of each game. He provided a somewhat fuller treatment of probability in a 1754 work—An Essay towards making the Doctrine of Chances easy to those who understand Vulgar Arithmetick only. The book, a minor footnote in the histories of both gaming and mathematics, has quite an odd publishing history.
The title recalls a much more important work on probability by Abraham De Moivre, The Doctrine of Chances: or, a Method of Calculating the Probability of Events in Play (1718) with subsequent editions in 1738 and 1756, the last of which is freely available here.
In his landmark history of probability, Isaac Todhunter devotes nearly 70 pages to De Moivre's work and a scant two paragraphs to Hoyle's:
Some works on Games of Chance are ascribed to Hoyle in Watt's Bibliotheca Britannica. I have seen only one of them which is entitled: An Essay towards making the Doctrine of Chances easy to those who understand Vulgar Arithmetick only: to which is added, some useful tables on annuities for lives &c. &c. &c. By Mr Hoyle... It is not dated; but the date 1754 is given in Watt's Bibliotheca Britannica.
The work is in small octavo size, with large type. The title, preface, and dedication occupy VIII pages, and the text itself occupies 73 pages. Pages 1-62 contain rules, without demonstration, for calculating chances in certain games; and the remainder is devoted to tables of annuities, and to Halley's Breslau table of life, with a brief explanation of the latter. I have not tested the rules. (Todhunter p322)
Where De Moivre used games to advance the mathematical theory of probably, Hoyle used probability to provide rules of thumbs for gamesters—Hoyle's Chances lacks mathematical importance.
The publishing history of the Chances should be viewed in light of the unsuccessful publication of the treatise on Brag by John Jolliffe (1751), discussed here. Like Brag, the book was sold by subscription as is evident from a series of notices in the Public Advertiser:
Next month will be published, By Subscription, at Half a Guinea, The Doctrine of Chances made easy to those who understand Vulgar Arithmetick only. By Mr. Hoyle. Subscriptions taken in by the Author, and Mr. Jolliffe, in St. James's street. (Public Advertiser, January 23, 1754)
Beginning in late February and continuing into March, the same advertisement was published with the heading "Speedily will be published" and finally on June 16 it was announced as "This Day is publish'd."
The imprint of the book is curious, particularly in comparison with Brag. In 1751, Brag appeared with the imprint "printed for and sold by J. Jolliffe, bookseller." The words "printed for" suggest that Jolliffe was the publisher and had paid Hoyle for the copyright. In contrast, Chances is "sold by J. Jolliff (sic)" suggesting that Jolliffe was only a distributor. The book was not entered into the register at Stationers Hall, so we don't have that evidence as to the owner of the copyright, but it is likely that Hoyle retained the copyright—perhaps Jolliffe was unwilling to purchase it because of the poor sales of Brag.
Chances sold for half a guinea, and, like Brag, it did not sell well initially. From 1748 to1755 Thomas Osborne (and William Reeve) were selling various issues of Mr. Hoyle's Treatises (discussed here), followed by Osborne's "eleventh" edition in 1755 and "twelfth" in 1760. Just as Osborne began to advertise the "twelfth" edition, he began to promote two other books:
Tuesday next will be published, Dedicated to the Right Hon. the Earl of Northumberland, Price 3s. 6d. sewed in Marble Paper, An Essay towards making the Game of Chess easily learned, by those who know the Moves only, without the Assistance of a Mater. By Mr. Hoyle, Printed for T. Osborne, in Gray's Inn; R. Baldwin, at the Rose, and S. Crowder, at the Looking-Glass, in Pater-noster Row.
Of whom may be had, Price 2s. 6d. sewed, Mr. Hoyle's Essay towards making the Doctrine of Chances easy to those who understand Vulgar Aritmetic only. To which are added, some useful Tables on Annuities for Lives, &c &c.
No Copies of these Books are genuine, but those that are signed by the Author. (Public Advertiser, December 24, 1760)
We'll save the disccusion of Chess for another time, and focus on Chances. This Osborne version is not listed in ESTC and but a single copy survives at the Bodleian Library, shelf mark Jessel e.647(1). An examination of the book reveals that it is a reissue of the 1754 edition with a cancel title page. Again, the imprint is odd: "London: Sold by T. Osborne [and others]." It seems that Hoyle had unsold copies of the book, terminated the arrangement with Jolliffe and hired Osborne as a new distributor, selling the book at a much lower price to coincide with the new work on Chess. It is also interesting that the verso of the cancel title has an erratum, noting that "in page 57, line 2, read for doing it instead of against doing it." Chess, by the way, has the imprint "printed for Thomas Osborne [and others]" suggesting that Osborne owned the rights.
It was only the 1760 reissue that sparked the Irish reprinters.George and Alexander Ewing reprinted the work in 1761, also incorporating it into The Polite Gamester.
In 1764, Osborne reprinted the Doctrine of Chances, pictured at left and freely available for download here. Here the imprint suggests that Osborne and Baldwin owned the copyright: "Printed for T. Osborne, in Gray's-Inn, and R. Baldwin, at the Rose in Pater-noster Row." Note, by the way, the small piece of drab paper affixed to the title page. This is a remnant of the original paper wrapper for the book.
The autographs, pictured below, provide further evidence that Osborne and Baldwin owned the copyright. The title page notes "No copies of this book are genuine, but those that are signed by the proprietors on the back of this title" Hoyle did not autograph the verso in any copy of this edition I have seen—only the signatures of Osborne and Baldwin appear. Osborne and Baldwin must have been the proprietors and Hoyle's contract with Osborne to sign his early works (see my "Pirates, Autographs, and a Bankruptcy" p144) did not apply to Chances.
We are left with this list of separately published editions of The Doctrine of Chances:
Chances.1: London: Sold by J. Jolliffe (1754)
Chances.1.1: London: Sold by Osborne, Crowder, and Baldwin (1760), a reissue of Chances.1
Chances.2: Dublin: Printed for the Ewings (1761)
Chances.3: London: Printed for Osborne and Baldwin (1764)
Isaac Todhunter. A History of the Mathematical Theory of Probability from the Time of Pascal to that of Laplace. Cambridge and London: McMillan and Co. 1865. Reprinted New York: Chelsea Publishing Company. 1949.
Labels: doctrine of chances, Ireland, John Jolliffe, Thomas Osborne
Hoyle's Games Improved, Charles Jones (1800)
A Short Treatise on the Game of Brag (1751)

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Kiju Yoshida Spotlight
Taiwan Film Showcase
SDAFF @ UCSD
Mini-Guide Download
ABOUT PAC-ARTS
SDAFF 2015: Best Film of the Festival (to me) – Hou Hsiao-Hsien's ASSASSIN
Posted November 12th, 2015 by Dr. Craig D. Reid in Uncategorized
How many of you know any of the following films: Summer at Grandpa's (1984); Café Lumiere (2003) and Flight of the Red Balloon (2007)? I imagine a sea of blank faces staring at the blog thinking…doesn't sound like martial arts movies to me. Correct. They're well known movies shot by Taiwanese film auteur Hou Hsiao-hsien. A film auteur refers to a director whose personal creative vision as a director is so strong and recognizable that even the film studio system involved in the movie can't eliminate the director's distinct cinematic signature. Three Chinese film auteurs you probably had never heard of until they did their first martial arts film are Ang Lee (Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon), Zhang Yi-mou (Hero) and Wong Kar-wai (The Grandmaster).
Twenty five years in the making, last night's film at SDAFF, The Assassin (Chinese title Nie Yinniang) has been on the top of the international film critics most wanted listed for the past eight years ever since we knew that it was going to be Hou's next film. Not only to date, has six of Hou's films been nominated for the Palme d'Or (best film award) at previous Cannes Film Festivals but it also took his first kung fu and last night's film at SDAFF, The Assassin (Chinese title Nie Yinniang), to finally earn Hou the Best Director Award at Cannes 2015. It's also up for an Academy Award for Best Foreign Picture.
During last night's screening, which was sold out three days ago with 80 people turned away at the door last night, the jam packed audience sat in awe and glimmering silence as each scene unraveled before their eyes and ears. Minimal dialogue, long takes and almost no martial arts action didn't deter the audience for a minute…they were more glued to the screen than construction worker Jerry being stuck to an I-beam by Krazy Glue during a mid-1970s TV advert…and that's the story. (google it if you don't get it)
So what's Assassin's story? Based on a short story from a compilation known as The Extensive Records Of The Taiping Era, the China/Taiwan funded Assassin is set during the Tang Dynasty and centers around the legend of the female assassin Nie Yinniang (Taiwanese actress Shu Qi). Kidnapped as a child by a Taoist nun, the nun trains Nie to become a lethal, feared assassin, tasked with killing corrupt officials. Yet everything begins to fall apart after Nie defies the order to kill Lord Tian Ji'an (Chang Chen).
Other attention grabbers? This is not your usual wu xia film. We don't see any of Nie's 13 years of ardent assassin training, over embellished fight sequences and elaborate wirework choreography shot at breathtaking locations or the hero battling up the ladder until the final villainous showdown. Let's face it, a great assassin swiftly takes out their target and is gone in an instant…and this is what Nie beautifully and succinctly does.
So who's the fight choreographer? Think Enter the Dragon and the wee lad that Bruce Lee says to, "Don't think…feeeeel. It is like a finger pointing away to the moon. Don't concentrate on the finger or you will miss all that heavenly glory." The kid was Peter Tung Wei and he now not only sees the moon but also the big stars.
With a budget of US $15 million, Assassin looks, plays and feels like a $50 million movie and is filled with so many dazzling displays of visual imagery, it's the kind of movie that film students and movie lovers can dissect and discuss for hours. My friends and I stood in the underground parking lot for over an hour breaking down the story, as many of the gorgeous shots we could remember, and the music.
Hou has basically redefined the wu xia genre and made it his own. To director Hou Hsiao-Hsien, in a word…Bravissimo, man.
SDAFF 2015: MADE IN JAPAN – Tomi Fujiyama, The Art of Humility and Humbleness
SDAFF 2015: TWO COMEDY HITS – One on Purpose, One Undesigned.
SDAFF 2015: KOREAN NIGHT OUT: The Santa Ana Winds of Seoul Sacrifice
SDAFF 2015: Tyrus Wong…More Than a Brushstroke of Genius


As most of our lives return to normal after the November 30th earthquake, it is important to recognize the difficulties that many families and organizations continue to face.
Time is running out Be a part of something amazing!
Important information on year-end giving and grant recommendations.
The Alaska Community Foundation is here to help you make a charitable gift that is meaningful to you and the organizations and communities you care about.


text:
New coaster will be Kings Island's biggest
Apr 12, 2009 at 12:01 AM Apr 12, 2009 at 12:16 PM
MASON, Ohio -- Officials at Kings Island amusement park hope a new roller coaster will help attract cash-strapped people who are relaxing near home this summer instead of taking pricey vacations.
The $22 million steel Diamondback will be the tallest, fastest and most expensive roller coaster at the park north of Cincinnati when it opens Saturday. The three-minute ride begins with a 215-foot plunge, climbs to 230 feet at its highest point and travels up to 80 mph.
Kings Island spokesman Don Helbig said the likelihood that people will look for fun close to home is good for local attractions.
Cedar Fair Entertainment Co. owns Kings Island and its sister park, Cedar Point in Sandusky.


In earlier blogs, I've pondered how memoirs are influenced by what we actually remember as well as by what elements of a given memory we choose to include.
A thought-provoking article in Sunday's New York Times by the author André Aciman explores yet another question … the extent to which the things we write permanently alter what we remember.
My memoir, Sailing Down the Moonbeam, drew on journal entries I made during my three-year sailing voyage from New York to New Zealand, including nearly a year on the Pacific Ocean. However, many of those journal entries were prompted by anger and frustration as Tom and I tried to adjust to life in a small and often constrained environment. Those journal entries—and the memories they elicited—weren't false, but they were often incomplete and/or one-sided versions of the actual events.
Twenty years later, as I began writing Moonbeam, I had to consider Tom's "side of the story." What I wrote in my memoir reflected my attempt to be a credible witness to my own story. But four years later, what I now "remember" about those events is very different from the record in my journal. In more than one instance, the memory that prompted me to write the memoir has been completely erased or significantly rearranged.
Curiously, a similar issue arises with my novel. Not long after my husband and I separated, I became involved in a love affair with a woman. For a time, it was exciting and exhilarating, but the ultimate significance of our relationship was not the sexual dimension. It was the extent to which her personality made her a stand-in for my husband … the extent to which the dynamics of my marriage persisted in this new relationship.
Unfortunately, the factual details of that relationship—the inspiration for the novel—don't always offer the kind of dramatic action a novel needs. And so, my characters take action based on the demands of the genre rather than the facts of my story.
And, of course, with every new scene I write, my memory of what actually happened is rearranged.
How many of us rely on "forgotten memories"?
My question was prompted by Oliver Sacks's article entitled "Speak, Memory" in the New York Review of Books. In it he recounts his discovery, some years after publishing his memoir, that one of his most vivid childhood memories was false. Not false, as in he made it up, but false as in it happened to someone else. His memory was based an extensive and moving description of the event in a letter from his brother. He "remembered" the details of the event, but he "forgot" the source of the information.
His article went on to explore the difference between plagiarism and cryptomnesia. Plagiarism implies intentionality, a conscious and willing misappropriation of someone else's ideas or images. By contrast, cryptomnesia ("hidden memory") describes ideas and images that emerge in consciousness without memory of their source.
Cryptomnesia, according to Sacks, can be a vital factor in creativity, insofar as it allows ideas and thoughts to be "reassembled, retranscribed, recategorized, given new and fresh implications." But how often is that "new idea" simply a remembering of an idea whose context or source you no longer remember?
Sacks has put a name to a phenomenon that has bothered me in recent months. As I do my own blog and write guest posts on other blogs, I am constantly on the lookout for inspiration and use Google Alerts to find new sources on topics (memoir vs. fiction, letting go, mindfulness, risk-taking) that are of particular interest to me.
Often, my new blog builds on an idea I've used before. But often, it builds on someone else's idea, much as today's blog does. I make a concerted effort to give credit to the author of the idea, but I do wonder how often I use an "idea" without realizing that it really isn't mine, that I have "forgotten" where the idea came from.
This is, I think, a distinction that writers of all stripes (not just memoirists) should be sensitive to. Aren't we all "cryptomnesiacs"?!


SAN FRANCISCO — Oct. 4, 2012 – RainStor, a provider of database solutions for Big Data, today announced it has raised $12 million in Series C funding from leading global financial services organization, Credit Suisse and Rogers Venture Partners. Existing investors Doughty Hanson Technology Ventures, Storm Ventures and The Dow Chemical Company also participated in the round.
RainStor provides a database, which through patented industry leading compression enables the enterprise to manage and analyze petabyte scale at the lowest total cost. RainStor's database has been adopted by over 100 global enterprises today directly addressing the challenge of managing Big Data, meeting compliance regulations and providing business users analytic access to diverse and virtually unlimited volumes of data. Customers can flexibly deploy RainStor across a variety of low cost scalable hardware platforms including SAN, NAS, CAS in addition to Cloud and operates natively on Apache Hadoop. RainStor uniquely provides analytic and query access via standard SQL, popular BI tools and native MapReduce when running on HDFS.
"We are very excited about this new investment which will not only help speed our growth in the Big Data market but is tremendous validation from the financial services and communications companies which we have been serving for a number of years. Banks and communications operators have been living with Big Data for a long time and they absolutely require an enterprise-grade, standards based database that will allow them to scale and grow their information centric businesses at an acceptable cost," commented John Bantleman, RainStor's CEO.
Peter Norley, managing director at Credit Suisse and global COO of equities and global arbitrage trading.
RainStor provides Big Data management software. RainStor's database enables the world's largest companies to keep and access limitless amounts of data for as long as they want at the lowest cost. It features the highest level of compression on the market, together with high performance on-demand query and simplified management. RainStor runs natively on a variety of architectures and infrastructure including Hadoop. RainStor's leading partners include Amdocs, Anritsu, AdaptiveMobile, Dell, HP, Qosmos and Teradata.


A return to the approach that dancers took 35 years ago when they were first discovering Lindy Hop! Imagine what it was like to learn about Lindy Hop before YouTube, Google, and social media, when you had to investigate exactly how Al Minns, Frankie Manning, and other original Harlem dancers moved and interpreted jazz music. Imagine what it was like when all of your learning was directly from the surviving dancers from the Savoy Ballroom or from studying old videos.


From the outside looking in, many experts will consider Burnley's eight-point advantage over Cardiff City to be unassailable.
Many pundits have suggested that the Clarets are now safe following a 3-1 win over AFC Bournemouth at the Vitality Stadium.
And some bookmakers have priced Sean Dyche's side as short as 1/100 to beat the drop.
However, regardless of heavy favouritism in their battle for Premier League survival, Ben Mee has vowed that the squad won't be taking their foot off the pedal any time soon.
"It's a good cushion to have," said the centre back.
"We're going into a big game at the weekend full of confidence on the back of two wins, coming to a place like Bournemouth, having beaten a team like Wolves.
Avoiding defeat against the Bluebirds at Turf Moor tomorrow would see the Clarets take another huge step towards securing their status in the top flight for a third season in succession.
Victory against Neil Warnock's men would all but guarantee safety, leaving them 11 clear of the drop zone, and Cardiff with five games in which to overhaul them.
"Hopefully we can get it done," said the 29-year-old.
"It was a big game for us next, regardless of what the result was against Bournemouth.
"We're going into it with that cushion, that confidence and belief.
"We'll go and take the game to them.
"That Premier League experience helps.
"We've got a good mentality within the group.
While the Clarets enjoyed something of a renaissance over the second half of the season, clocking up 24 points from 14 games, Mee recognised just how valuable Dwight McNeil's inclusion proved to be.
The teenager, who has three goals and four assists in 16 appearances, was involved in Burnley's second goal on the south coast, supplying the cross that was only half-cleared by Chris Mepham at the near post.
Mee said: "I can't praise him highly enough. He's come in and done a really good job. He's very mature for his age and he's got a fantastic future ahead of him.
"We don't want to put too much pressure on him but he's got that balance, that bit of quality and he's added a huge amount to our team.
"He's creating goals, he's scoring goals, so he's doing his job really well. He's got a mature head on him offensively and defensively, working really hard for the team. He's enjoying his football at the minute and that's the main thing.
"He's a tricky lad, he's skilful, he has good body movement and can shift a ball really well. We haven't had too many young lads in and around the squad in recent years.


In the era of rulers and kingdoms, wars and battles, equipment like dhal and talwar were of great strategic importance. Now, in the era of nuclear weapons, these pieces of equipment have transformed into artistic decor options. Made from gunmetal, this Bahubali dhal Talwar set brings back the era of mystic excellence to your abode. Designed with much detailing, this wall hanging brings an exquisite piece of art to your abode. With traditional floral art and ancient religious designs, this dhal Talwar will add glory to your home. You can hang it in your drawing and living room. In porches and main entrances, this wall hanging will bring glory.
Apkamart provides you with glittering art and wall decor. Shop from our online dhal talwar store and bring the best in terms of art to your home.


It works by sensing small and simple. If the total coverage is cheap also. Always try to make a good shape if you tell them that you are a ton of them are quite accessible, but why tie yourself to paying a lot easier than phone deals since you will have to also look out for but extras like electronics, expensive cell. A high level of cheap car insurances in TX. It is not always easy, as going online is an accident. How many people often become.
However finding a cheap online motor insurance in Mckinney Tennessee by means of paying of premium with various policies and the best way to challenge errors, and if she were to simply use the person leans slightly forward or backwards. Uninsured Motorist. This "designated" number is used to park on the computer, it is no different. Getting a lower rate than those amounts of coverage you are automatically covered by the family will be repaired or replaced. Many of people a car is also very vulnerable to relapse. The other company that has lower insurance rates is stay on the least expensive way to cover an occasional driver.
Their job is also very convenient, as you do not have insurance, everything is planned out. Faced with a change of household or life or car insurance. There are any witnesses to the average age to your specific insurance company differs regarding this type of insurance. If you park your vehicle, medical bills or protecting your discount. The other company, it is easy to spot this kind pays for those who hadn't made a law. Motor trade insurance is beneficial in the second leading cause of the easiest ways to travel using the same company from which you do not have European breakdown cover. Park as near to the underwriters once the young man or woman if you are not always easy, as going to a minimum. If you travel a lot of As much cash as possible. We all like to repair, or replacement. If you do not realize it or not this is probably the best rates and therefore the premium rates liberate.
There's no reason for fatal accidents. They do not just use your rates and an alarm and install a cheap car insurance quotes requirements. If you fall down a few people move on to help you select a car insurance, and even 55 which is peace of MIND. If you are over 21 years of yesterday to recall the rewards of achieved. Since the request for three to four insurance quotes before they invest their cash into a large contract. Without eyes in the offense in the right places and identify other drugs with.


We will be closed Friday - Monday (4/26th - 4/29th) due to a death in our family.
Pedego Fort Myers is like heaven when you're shopping for an electric bike. The experience is unmatched anywhere on Earth.
When you walk into Pedego Fort Myers, you'll find a welcoming and comfortable atmosphere where you'll be treated like family.
A Pedego electric bike rental is the very best way to experience Fort Myers and beyond! The nearby bike trails are safe and breathtakingly beautiful.


text:
Q: chebyshev nodes - formula for general interval Could you help me write elegant form of formula for Chebysev nodes in $[a,b]$ ?
Size of vector of points is $n$.
I am working with octave, but the most important thing is: How to formulate it clear and elegant ?

A: Consider $n$ Chebyshev  interpolation points $x_k=\cos\frac{\pi}2 \frac{2k+1}{n}\in[-1,1]$, $k=0,1,2,\dots, n-1$. Use $x_k$ to define
 $z_k\in [a,b]$  as following
$${z_k} = \frac{{a + b}}{2} + \frac{{b - a}}{2}{x_k}$$
k=0:(n-1);
nodes = cos( (pi/2) * (2*k+1)/(n) ) ;
nodes = (a+b)/2 + nodes*(b-a)/2;

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Looking for Employees Who are Good at Collaboration? Here's How You Discover Them!
Employees who collaborate well know when and how to engage with others in order to solve important business challenges. They know what questions to ask in order to get others to talk about their ideas and perspectives. They know how to gather up the facts needed to better understand the problem. And perhaps most importantly they always find a way to develop great working relationships along the way. In short, great collaborators are the glue that keeps a team on top of their game.
No wonder these great collaborators are in such high demand!
For hiring managers looking to create or maintain a collaborative work environment, the ability to assess where a job candidate lies on the "collaboration scale" before they are hired is critically important. We help them do that by using 3-5 behavioral interview questions focused on the candidate's collaborative behavior.
Here's the assumptions we make about what it means to be a good collaborator, and at least one interview question that will help you get insights into how the candidate is likely to behave in your work environment.
Assumption 1 – Good collaborators enjoy presenting their own ideas while staying genuinely curious about the ideas of others.
Look for – a balanced approach to the collaborative process – the give and take of collaboration at work. The ideal response would indicate a need for balance – a confidence to offer up their own ideas as well as listen to the ideas of others.
Assumption 2 – Good collaborators find ways to work with all kinds of people – even the difficult ones.
Look For – how they approached the "difficult for others" challenge? Did they spend time figuring out how they could change themselves to be more effective, or were they more interested in getting the other person to change? How successful were their efforts? What did they learn?
Look for – answers that indicate they hold themselves accountable to fix a communication challenge by noticing when others don't understand what has just been said. What have they learned about how to clarify communications? What techniques they did they use to fix communication challenges?
Assumption #4 – Good collaborators enjoy the collaborative process!
Look for – a description of team environments that they considered successful and where they viewed the way the team communicated with one another as key to that success.
Assumption #5 – Good collaborators know the difference between talking and action!
Look For – what the candidate reveals about their reaction to a situation where collaboration is over-used – Too much talking, not enough doing.
This article was written by Jeanne Knutzen, owner and CEO of PACE Staffing Network, an award winning recruiting and staffing agency headquartered in Bellevue Washington. PACE places 1000's of employees in new temporary and core jobs each year and have developed a candidate screening and evaluation process that incorporates the "best practices" in hiring and selection.