Notes About Baseball

The hot dog is the platypus of the sandwich family.

Well done. Sandwich Prospectus is real...and it's spectacular

I would like to have seen a poll for the readers.

Craig nailed it. There is no intent to sandwich the hot dog in a bun. Hence a hot dog in a bun is not a sandwich. However if you put a hot dog between two slices of bread (you're a barbarian if you do this), then it becomes a sandwich. An open face sandwich isn't really a sandwich either. It's more like a pie.

We focus first on the bread, but the answer is in the meat. Tubular meat is the distinguishing feature. Tony was so close.

Little concerned about the photo used... that looks like a sausage! Furthermore there is ketchup on that thing? No one over the age of 7 puts ketchup on a Hot Dog. This definitely needs a little more research.

I think this is the first time the entire article lost it's credibility on the last sentence alone. Ketchup and Hot Dogs go together like children and flamethrowers.

"No food-thing is more essential to the ballpark experience"

I'm gonna have to stop you here. Come to Milwaukee and have some sort of sausage. Be it a brat, a polish, italian, or chorizo and you will realize the error of your ways, thinking a hot dog is the ultimate ballpark food. Though you are totally on point calling these sandwiches.

This is bad and wrong

Addressing the Elephant in the Room:

I realized my ketchup admission would be unpopular, but felt you guys deserved honesty here. It would've been easy to say I never put ketchup on a hotdog. That would've been the easy thing.

Alas, I sometimes do... usually when we're out of the 80 mustard.

Please respect my choice.

p.s. I'll add that I think this ketchup/hotdog thing is a bit overstated. The sweet/salty paradigm works in most food-things, as it does on a hotdog. The ratio--therein lies the rub, as too much ketchup can overpower the mustard, which should act as the star condiment.

I think we can all agree that a hot dog is a hot dog and a sandwich wis a sandwich. But can they be one and the same.

If I told you to imagine a pastrami sandwich, you'd probably imagine meat sliced think, piled high on some rye bread, mustard and/or horsey sauce, and pickles (within the creation or to the side). Maybe you'd imagine a cheese on here as well. But none of us whom are sane would hesitate to call this a sandwich.

Now when I say "hot dog," what comes to mind? Ballpark, overpriced beer, terrible parking lot experience on the way to the stadium, an already inebriated fan proclaiming the "awesomeness" of a player that is clearly washed up... back to the topic at hand please. You probably imagine a "frank" inside of a hotdog bun (sesame seed or not- and it better be the former), with condiments (mustard, relish, onions, etc, (if you use ketchup you are a terrorist)). Putting hot dog franks (sliced or still in intact tube form) inside of two pieces of flat bread, you ARE a heathen, and you have also just made a blasphemous sandwich.

When you order a hot dog, you usually just say "I'll have a hot dog." however when ordering an above discussed pastrami dish, you'd probably have to say "I'll have a pastrami SANDWICH."

When buying ingredients at the supermarket, toppings are toppings; but you oo to the deli for sandwich meat. You go to the hot dog/meat in cooler section for some "franks." There is a bread aisle where you can find all types and brands. However, hot dog "buns" (not "bread") may or may not be located in the same aisle.

Furthermore, when at a ballpark/picnic/grill-out/etc. The same thing applying to hot dog franks inside of a hot dog bun would apply to Polish Sausage (at times, superior even to the best of hot dogs), or a Bratwurst. You would not ask for a "Polish Sausage sandwich" or a "Bratwurst Sandwich" and expect it in the same format. You might expect such and order to arrive on a Kaiser roll, perhaps. Bread style/choice matters.

As for the argument of "wrap," "hamburger," or "burrito," I would argue for a new system of judgement along the lines of intent: marketability. Is something being marketed as a sandwich? Perhaps this is too close to the definition of intent. However, no one would ever say "I'll have a burrito sandwich." A burrito is very much its own thing. The same applies to the hamburger. A pulled-pork sandwich on a hamburger "bun" (read: not just bread, but a bun(s)) is a sandwich under the intent rule. A grey area for this is something on a hamburger bun that combined both pulled pork AND a hamburger patty (e.g. The Texas BBQ Burger now being offered at Carl's Jr.). I consider this a hybrid creation, a Frankenstein creation of food (but so, so tasty).

Wraps would also fall under this hybrid of food. It combines elements of a burrito and elements of a sandwich.

A sandwich does no necessarily need meat either. As was noted in the article, PB&J is a sandwich. This falls under the intent argument. Also, a "roasted tomato [and] caprese" could be called a sandwich, and not just a "caprese." Though the caprese comes in many forms including salad, so it should not be trusted.

I could go on, but my boss/IT might be suspicious why I spent so much time on a baseball site arguing sandwiches.

To recap: bread choice (style/kind), intent, marketability... with a grey area for hybrid food creations (and next weeks article).

I know this is going to get some negative votes, but ketchup on a hot dog should be outlawed. Its disgusting.

Should a hot dog win MVP

a hot dog is the daddy long legs of food, not a spider and not an insect.

From a theoretically scientific perspective, the topology of the hot dog, the hamburger and the slice of deli meat are all the same. Therefore, mathematically, what sits inside the bread is essentially all the same thing. The case can be made, however, that the bread it not the same - a hamburger bun and a hot dog bun, formed as one piece, is topologically the same as a wrap, or even a moebius strip, and altogether different than TWO slices of bread (but identical to ONE). Therefore the argument can be made that the topology of the out later keeps burgers, hot dogs and wraps from being sandwiches, unless they are somehow modified (or torn).

A torus-shaped bread structure, colloquially a bagel or donut, is also topologically identical to a cylinder therefore can be considered as the same object.

In essence, what this means from a scientific perspective, and considering the implications of these breads as Gaussian surfaces as well, for the calculation of field strengths, is that I am now quite hungry.

I, for one, have found that only by putting ketchup on hot dogs (be they sandwiches or no) can I stand to eat them game after minor league game.

They're not sandwiches, though.

At the risk of mixing two different realms of thought, a quick read of Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations should answer the question. (Though, as I recall, he uses the category "game" as his example -- is 'a game of catch' a game?)

when did we stop recognizing wikipedia as the final authority on all matters? (sarcasm!)

"A hot dog (also spelled hotdog) is a cooked sausage, traditionally grilled or steamed and served in a sliced bun as a sandwich."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_dog

I haven't spent nearly as much time thinking about this as many clearly have. But it seems a hot dog begins as a sandwich. However, once the condiments are applied outside of the confines of the sandwich, it loses sandwich eligibility and is now a hot dog. When asked to describe a hot dog, no one will only describe the bun and the meat, but the condiments as well. I can't think of a sandwich that has condiments added on top of it outside of the sandwich. The hot dog bun is intended to enclose the sandwich, and your mustard is not intended to go inside the bun.

The hot dog is the hot button issue of our time.

I wonder if this will become BP's most commented-upon article.

What would John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich, have to say? His invention hinged on the history-changing insight that bread can serve as a vehicle for meats and/or other ingredients that would otherwise be unseemly to consume without the use of fork and knife. For Montagu, form followed function: he wanted to eat without fussing over dishes. Would this man have shunned the first sandwich had his cook presented him with a frankfurter in a half-cleaved baguette? He would not. The 4th Earl of Sandwich was nothing if not a practical man. He did not stand on ceremony, nor did he let the conventions of his epoch preclude him from eating a substantial, utensil-free repast while playing cards. Clearly, then, any loosely systematized arrangement of bread-borne ingredients, eaten literally out of hand, without utensils, fits the original definition of a sandwich.

But let us follow Montagu's stunning insight and brave example to their logical conclusions, lest we allow convention to obscure the possibilities inherent in his vision. If form followed function for Montagu, then the components of the original sandwich must have mattered less to him than the concept of the non-utensil food delivery system. Had he lived to see their invention, might it not be that Montagu would have bestowed the proud name of his earldom on chips and salsa, pita and hummus, injera and lentils, or even marinara sauce dipped from the jar with a large uncooked pasta shell?

If Thomas Jefferson is a sandwich, then hot dogs are his black descendants. They just want to be invited to the family barbeque.

I don't really like the argument regarding an intent to close. Cheesesteaks and hoagies are universally recognized as sandwiches, but the quantity of meat inside means there should be no reasonable expectation of the bread to close. By Craig Breslow's logic, these objects should be removed from the sandwich distinction, similar to Pluto losing its status as a planet.

If KFC can call bacon and cheese between two pieces of breaded chicken WITH NO BUN OF ANY SORT a sandwich, I don't see why any object purposely enclosed by another object cannot be legitimately regarded as a sandwich.

I say we grease up the slippery slope and let it all slide.

A lobster roll is not a sandwich, and since a hot dog is basically served on the same "bread construction" as a lobster roll, I'd say "no" to "is a hot dog a sandwich?"

More reading on "sandwich"
http://www.open-sandwich.co.uk/town_history/sandwich_origin.htm

Hot dogs are not sandwiches. Hot dogs are tacos. Quesadillas are sandwiches.

If this is not the entire next episode of TINO, we have failed as a society.

Also it is worth a note that in the State of Massachusetts: Sandwich must have 2 slices of bread.
Http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2006/11/10/arguments_spread_thick/

Wow. I've officially converted to hot dog sandwichdom. Didn't see that coming.

Now that the hot dog discussion has been well tread, I feel the next step is to take the question to its logical extremes, find the line of sandwich demarcation:

e.g. Is a sushi roll a sandwich?

To me... it's all about the the VERB sandwich.

"To insert or squeeze (someone or something) between two other people or things, typically in a restricted space or so as to be uncomfortable."

So it's all about one thing being in between two other things.

Two distinct halves of a hot dog make a hot dog a sandwich. The dog itself is SANDWICHED between the halves.

Two distinct halves of a hard-shelled taco make a hard-shelled taco a sandwich.

Two distinct halves of a quesadilla make a quesadilla a sandwich.

Since a wrap contains a continuous circle (from the end view), and not two distinct halves, a wrap is NOT a sandwich. HOWEVER, if the two ends of the wrap's tortilla are folded out from under themselves, the wrap can be turned into a quesadilla structure with two distinct halves and hence SANDWICHING the insides.

So a wrap is a wrap, but it CAN be turned into a sandwich.

Pizza, especially when eaten properly has many of the same characteristics as a hot dog. This does not make it a sandwich.

Maki is not a god damn sandwich, even though you've got one element enclosing another element. A jelly doughnut is also not a sandwich. Neither are combos, or M&Ms.

A bagel, sliced in half and eaten with cream cheese and lox on top, is not a sandwich. Put the two halves back together and it is now a sandwich.

This illustrates the real point - it's a sandwich if you are sandwiching something between two flat pieces. A KFC Double Down is a sandwich, no matter how horrifying. A taco isn't one. Neither is a burrito, tax law be damned.

If you need a super-class that encloses all these things for some nefarious purpose, I suppose you can call them whatever you want. But that has as much validity as referring to a piece of toilet paper as a Kleenex. We get what you're saying, but I'm still going to narrow my eyes as I hand it to you.

This is easily the most commented on article I've ever seen at BP. Well done, sir.

Hot dogs aren't sandwiches, of course, but well done just the same.

a burrito is a sandwich, but not a "smothered" burrito, which one would eat with a fork (and presumably a knife) - therefor bread (or a bread like device) and portability are the two essential sandwich elements. if you can't eat it in the car, it's not a sandwich.

Baseball journalism!

This type of content should really require a SUBscription.

After reading all the way through these comments, the consensus is clearly that most people eventually admit that a hot dog is a sandwich, even if they initially balked at the idea.

Nonetheless, Josh Hamilton's observation that kicked off the article remains true: "if you ask someone to make you a sandwich, they aren't going to make you a hot dog."

We've come full circle.

It's a sandwich if "X" clearly cannot be eaten with the bare hands, and requires two pieces of bread or a bun of some sort to consume easily. Sausages can easily be eaten neatly without help, so you call them by their sausage-name, and not a sandwich.

To inject a bit of history, Jim's original, one of the classic Chicago hot dog places, pretty clearly classifies the hot dog as a sandwich. I have a picture of an old picture that indicates "free fries with all sandwiches" where the hot dog, Polish sausage, and hamburger all qualify. Even their current website says the same thing, indicates they have the world's greatest sandwiches, and calls the Polish sausage the original Polish sausage sandwich (http://www.jimsoriginal.com/jimsoriginal/Welcome/ for the curious).

So an article about hot dogs gets the record for most comments? lol...

At first i thought it can't be, a sandwich must be ensconced in two separate pieces of bread. A hot dog bun, even though it will eventually likely tear apart, especially if you dip it in water a la Joey Chestnut, is still joined at birth. Then I think of a Chicago Italian beef, it is on french or italian bread and the bottom doesn't fall out until the third bite or so. That is definitely a sandwich. I would rather continue to ponder the hot dog question and the what the hell happened to Justin Verlander question so once I figure it out I will be back.

So it's the last day of the MLB regular season, and I'm on a flight without wifi access. So, I can rationalize / philosophize about this great American conundrum, and hit send once I've landed (probably after checking on all the games I've missed). You all get to read (or ignore) my thought process at your peril.

What are the important distinctions to make up a sandwich?

1). A sandwich is a solid food. Edible, though not necessarily nutritious. I can't even think of anything that one might call a sandwich that is also either liquid or inedible. There are metaphorical sandwiches such as getting smooshed in the middle seat on a cross-country flight between two large strangers, but that's just a metaphor. Or, it's an alternate definition at best.

2) In addition to being a food, a sandwich is a Finger Food. Food to be consumed without utensils, and with your hands. Utensils are a disqualifying tool. And so, the method of consumption is inherent in the definition of a sandwich. The Earl of Sandwich, I do believe, created this genre of food, and it was created for the very purpose of eliminating utensils.

Forks, knives, spoons, chop sticks, skewers, and any other inedible delivery tool that comes between your hands and the food being consumed disqualifies that food from being a sandwich. Sushi, no. Fondue, no. Kebab, no. Corn dog, no.

2a) important note: a toothpick holding together your sandwich before or during consumption is acceptable, as long as you don't typically hold that implement in the act of picking up or eating it.

3). A sandwich has at least two unique food components brought together to create a combined finger food. Cheese sticks are not a sandwich. Beef jerky is not a sandwich.

4). One of the components is a grain-based product. Salami wrapped around the cheese stick is not a sandwich. Peanut butter spread into a celery stick is not a sandwich. A piece of prosciutto wrapped around a piece of melon is not a sandwich.

5). At the time of the assembly/combining of components, the grain-based component of a sandwich is a serve-able food product.

This eliminates from the sandwich family any finger foods where a dough is baked after the food is assembled, such as pizza. Or pigs in a blanket.

5a). However, once assembled to become a sandwich, it can be heated prior to serving. A toasted sandwich is still a sandwich.

6). The grain-based product is baked. Even though a doughnut is a grain-based product, a jelly-stuffed doughnut is not a sandwich.

6a). However, in the heating of an already-assembled sandwich (see 5a), frying is acceptable. Grilled cheese is still a sandwich after it has been fried / grilled.

7). The non-grain based component(s) is/are placed or spread onto or within the grain-based product that has been opened to receive them. Dipping a dinner roll (even one that has been opened) into olive oil does not make it sandwich. Spreading butter into one, however, is a sandwich.

7a). Once assembled, a sandwich can be dipped into a dressing or sauce. E.g. french dip.


I think this is all it takes to be a sandwich:

An assembled finger food with one one or more components spread or placed onto a grain-based baked good that has been opened to receive it.

Good timing, too, because I just landed.

You went overboard with the butter sandwich. Next thing you know we have an air sandwich.

Nonsense, Burr! I think you've done fine work. And yes, I wasn't thinking quite deeply enough about the component ingredients of the dessert sandwiches I proffered; each does include flour, of course, so your grain rule would hold in those cases.

As for the rest, yes, I'd personally prefer to err on the side of inclusionary than exclusionary. So perhaps your 'baked' aspect still needs some fine tuning. And clearly a cupcake isn't a sandwich, so we'll need to sort out the layer language.

As for the rest, the grain thing still seems a bit finicky--there has to be an exception that'll give us the dreaded 'but wait' moment--but I'll roll it around with my local sandwich think tank (Mrs. DeMaro) and try to come up with a potential improvement.

I'm off to bed myself; see you guys tomorrow...