Pete Rose, Major League Baseball’s all-time hits leader, died on September 30, 2024, at age 83. He never had the opportunity to experience the immense honor of being inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown. Ironically, he had been welcomed into the Hall on multiple occasions to sign memorabilia.

Pete Rose’s case is unlike any other in Major League Baseball history. In March 2025, even U.S. President Donald Trump said he would grant the legendary player a presidential pardon, arguing that Rose should have been inducted into the Hall of Fame long before his death and criticizing MLB for failing to recognize his accomplishments on the field. Of course, a presidential pardon has no bearing on Hall of Fame eligibility. Cooperstown has its own rules and selection process. John Dowd, the attorney who led MLB’s investigation into Rose, made that distinction himself in 2025.

But this debate is about more than the opinion of the U.S. president. There is also a logical, if somewhat contradictory, element to Rose’s case that has continued to shape the discussion over his Hall of Fame eligibility.

The available evidence indicates that Rose bet on the Cincinnati Reds, not against them, including during the years when he served as the team’s player-manager and later managed the club full-time. The 1989 Dowd Report, which investigated Rose’s gambling activities from 1985 through 1987, documented that his bets were made on the Reds.

Pete Rose bet on the Reds, not against them

The report makes the point explicitly: “No evidence was discovered that Rose bet against the Cincinnati Reds.”

Additional betting records surfaced in 2015, including records from 1986, but none showed Rose betting against the team he managed. MLB likewise stated that there was no evidence Rose had bet against Cincinnati.

Questions resurfaced years later when John Dowd said he believed Rose had probably bet against the Reds at some point. But Dowd also acknowledged that he never found evidence of such a wager during his investigation.

What the available evidence does establish is that Rose bet on his own team. And that distinction matters to the way his case is often discussed, even though it did not change the rule he violated.

MLB’s rule did not distinguish between betting for or against a team. A player, manager or other club official who wagered on a game in which he had a professional obligation was subject to permanent ineligibility.

Major Leagues MLB: What to Expect From Lázaro Montes in 2027? Statistical Projection and Role With the Seattle Mariners

The integrity issue went beyond the possibility that a manager might intentionally try to lose. A manager who bets on his own team can still create a conflict of interest. His financial stake could potentially influence decisions such as how long to leave a pitcher in the game or whether to remove a player who is dealing with an injury.

That said, those scenarios are hypothetical. There is no evidence that Rose intentionally manipulated games to benefit his bets. And if the wager was on his own team, the argument can be made that his financial interest would have aligned with his responsibility to win.

The rule, however, did not make that distinction.

Why should Pete Rose be in the Baseball Hall of Fame?

I believe Pete Rose deserves a plaque in Cooperstown. There are several objective arguments that support that position, although there is also a strong argument on the other side because of his gambling.

Rose owns MLB’s all-time record with 4,256 hits. He also played in 3,562 games, accumulated 14,053 at-bats and recorded 3,215 singles — all historic totals.

But his career was about much more than piling up hits.

Pete Rose was a 17-time All-Star, the 1963 National League Rookie of the Year and the 1973 National League MVP. He won three batting titles and three World Series championships, including World Series MVP honors in 1975.

His longevity and consistency were extraordinary. Rose played 24 seasons and finished his career with a .303 batting average. He was not simply a player who produced a handful of spectacular seasons. He remained productive for more than two decades.

He was also a central figure on one of the greatest teams in baseball history: the Cincinnati Reds’ “Big Red Machine,” which won back-to-back World Series championships in 1975 and 1976. Rose later won another championship with the Philadelphia Phillies in 1980.

Separating Rose’s playing career from his punishment

The central argument in Rose’s defense is that his Hall of Fame candidacy should be evaluated primarily on what he accomplished as a player, while his gambling violation should be treated as a separate disciplinary matter.

In 2015, then-commissioner Rob Manfred made a similar distinction, noting that reinstatement by MLB and eligibility for the Hall of Fame were separate issues.

There remains, however, one fundamental obstacle.

Rose was placed on baseball’s permanently ineligible list in 1989 after MLB determined that he had bet on baseball games while managing the Reds. Although the available evidence does not show that he bet against Cincinnati, betting on games involving his own team still violated MLB rules.

That status changed after Rose’s death.

In May 2025, MLB determined that permanent ineligibility ends when the person dies. As a result, Rose became eligible to be considered for the Baseball Hall of Fame.

That does not mean he is automatically a Hall of Famer. It simply means the door to consideration is no longer closed by his placement on baseball’s permanently ineligible list.

Pete Rose’s legacy remains complicated

It seems fitting to end where this discussion began, with Donald Trump.

Trump has been outspoken in support of Rose and has repeatedly argued that the legendary switch-hitter belongs in the Hall of Fame. He has made the case in particularly direct terms, emphasizing Rose’s accomplishments on the field while acknowledging the gambling that ultimately defined his relationship with baseball.

In a Los Angeles Times article published Oct. 2, 2024, Trump’s position was summed up in a few words: “He bet, but only on his own team to win.”

Major Leagues MLB: Javier Báez’s difficult 2026 season. Is he still dealing with the effects of his injuries?

That argument has always been central to the case for Rose: remember him for what he accomplished on the field while judging the gambling separately as an off-field violation.

Betting on baseball was a serious violation of MLB’s rules. There is no disputing that.

But there is also a distinction that remains important to many people: Pete Rose did not bet against his own team. The evidence indicates that he bet on the Reds to win.

His case will continue to generate debate. His place in baseball history, however, is difficult to separate from either side of the argument. Rose remains MLB’s all-time hits leader, one of the most accomplished and durable hitters the sport has ever produced, and one of the most controversial figures in the history of the Hall of Fame debate.

Major Leagues Through sheer pain: Randy Arozarena sets records in Seattle and Major League Baseball.