Baker Bowl’s Famous “Hump” May Have Been in the Street, Not the Outfield

A hump in center field makes a fine ballpark story. It gives an outfielder one more thing to judge, a ground ball one more chance to misbehave, and an old stadium one more feature that could never survive a modern design review. Baker Bowl, the Philadelphia Phillies’ former home at Broad Street and Lehigh Avenue, had plenty of peculiarities. The familiar explanation for one of them is that railroad tracks passing beneath the grounds created a rise in the outfield.

The trouble is that the clearest contemporary use of the name “the Hump” points not to center-field grass but to work at the intersection outside the park.

Original charcoal editorial illustration evoking Baker Bowl’s diagonal boundary beside Philadelphia rail infrastructure; interpretive study, not an exact park reconstruction.

In an 1894 account of its expenditures, the Philadelphia & Reading Railroad listed improvements at Broad and Lehigh Avenue “commonly designated the ‘Hump.’” It is a wonderfully specific entry: the name existed, the location is identifiable, and the railroad itself used it. What the entry does not say is that a hump occupied Baker Bowl’s playing surface. That distinction matters because the railroad really did help shape the ballpark and its neighborhood. The legend did not invent the connection. It appears to have moved the name—and with it an explanation—from the surrounding streets and tracks onto the field. (fraser.stlouisfed.org)

Baker Bowl is an inviting place for such a story to take hold. Its field was irregular, its right-field distance was short, and its boundaries reflected the demands of a crowded Philadelphia block. There was even a documented slope in the original grounds. But that slope was a left-field terrace, not proof of the celebrated center-field hump. To understand what the legend leaves out, it helps to look past the supposed bump in the turf and toward the meeting of a railroad, two streets and a major-league ballpark.

The Phillies’ original grounds occupied the block bounded by Broad Street, 15th Street, Huntingdon Street and Lehigh Avenue. According to a Society for American Baseball Research history drawing on descriptions from 1887 newspapers, Reading Railroad track ran by the northeast corner. The outfield fence followed a diagonal line that screened the tracks. Left field had a long terrace. These were not details added by a later storyteller to make an ordinary park sound quaint. They were features of a playing field fitted into a site that already had obligations beyond baseball. (sabr.org)

That early layout is important for two reasons. First, it establishes the railroad’s presence without requiring a tunnel beneath center field to explain the park’s shape. Second, it reminds us that an outfield could be unusual in more than one way. Baker Bowl’s actual left-field terrace deserves to be remembered on its own terms, rather than recruited as evidence for a different rise in a different part of the grounds.

The city around the park was changing, too. At grade crossings, streets and trains competed for the same space. The work at Broad and Lehigh belonged to that problem. A Pennsylvania Supreme Court case later reproduced authority directing changes to street grades so they could pass over railroad lines. The legal record establishes the basic purpose of the changes; it is not a detailed plan of the ballpark. Together with the railroad’s 1894 account, though, it places “the Hump” in a recognizable setting: a street-and-rail project at the edge of the baseball grounds. (case-law.vlex.com)

A street raised to cross a rail line is easier to imagine than a phrase in a railroad account. It changes the approach to a corner, the relationship between pavement and track, and the way an adjoining property meets the street. Around Baker Bowl, such changes occurred beside a field whose dimensions were already constrained by the block. The ballpark and the works were part of the same physical landscape. They were not necessarily the same feature.

One alteration affected the field directly. SABR’s park history reports that the extension of Lehigh Avenue through to Broad Street in 1893 took away the original left-field terrace and changed the dimensions of the grounds. That is a substantial baseball consequence of a street project. The city did not need to place a hill in center field to change how the park played. Shifting a boundary and removing part of the original ground were consequential enough. (sabr.org)

Fire forced another change. A 1894 blaze destroyed the pavilion, right-field fence and parts of the bleachers, but the field remained. The Phillies rebuilt on the site, opening the replacement park in 1895. Measurements reported for those grounds give roughly 390 feet to left field, 408 to center and 290 to right. Those are measurements for that version of the park, not permanent specifications for every season it stood. Their value here is less as a set of numbers than as a reminder of the asymmetry. The rebuilt field still had to work within streets, neighboring rail property and the boundaries of its lot. Its shape did not come from a single picturesque obstacle. (sabr.org)

In later accounts, however, a simpler explanation proved durable. A 1982 SABR history said the park was called “the Hump” because it stood on elevated land that allowed Reading tracks to pass beneath. Read alone, that account joins the railroad, a raised site and the ballpark’s nickname in one neat sentence. It also shows that the explanation had become part of baseball history. It does not establish that players encountered a hump in the center-field playing surface. (sabr.org)

A more recent SABR park history challenges that particular claim. Pointing to period newspaper coverage and railroad trade-journal reports, it argues that the famous center-field hump did not exist and locates the name in the raised streets around the rail improvements. The older and newer histories should not be flattened into an easy contest between believers and debunkers. They are useful together: one shows how the ballpark explanation circulated, while the other returns attention to records made when the work was happening. (sabr.org)

The railroad’s annual-report wording is especially valuable because it asks so little of the reader. “The Hump” was what the company called improvements at Broad and Lehigh. That is a documented use of the term close in time to the project. It does not settle every question about what lay beneath or alongside every part of Baker Bowl over its long life. Nor does it, by itself, describe each grade, retaining wall or track alignment. But it gives the name a firm address. Anyone wishing to put that name instead on a rise in center-field turf needs evidence for the move. (fraser.stlouisfed.org)

There is another reason to be precise about the railroad story. Philadelphia later undertook a broader depression of Reading’s City Branch tracks, beginning in 1897 and reaching completion around 1900. That work also grew out of the conflict between rail traffic and city streets, but it was not simply another name for the 1893–94 Broad-and-Lehigh improvements. Fold the two projects together, and a long series of changes can sound like one dramatic operation performed beneath a ballpark. Keeping them distinct makes the neighborhood’s history more intelligible, not less interesting. (blog.phillyhistory.org)

The view from a later map reinforces how much of this story belongs to the block. A 1910 atlas shows the ballpark in the street grid rather than as an isolated oval. Broad and Lehigh were not scenery beyond the stands. They were boundaries and routes whose alteration could change the available ground. The Reading line likewise was not merely a handy origin for a nickname. It was part of the city’s transportation system, with practical claims on space next to the Phillies’ home. (philageohistory.org)

That is the richer version of Baker Bowl’s oddity. The park was neither a standard field with a miraculous obstacle dropped into center nor a victim of pure folklore. Its early diagonal fence protected the rail side of the grounds. Its left-field terrace existed and then disappeared with a street extension. Its rebuilt dimensions reflected an awkward urban parcel. The improvements called “the Hump” belonged to the effort to carry streets across railroad infrastructure near the park. Each detail is distinctive; none requires the unsupported assertion that a tunnel made a hill in the middle of the outfield.

Ballpark stories often survive because they compress complicated ground into something a fan can picture at once. A railroad tunnel producing a hump is a compact image. Street grades, a diagonal fence, a vanished terrace and successive versions of a field take longer to explain. Yet those pieces give Baker Bowl something better than a curiosity: a history of baseball being made to fit a working city.

The Phillies played beside a railroad while Philadelphia changed the terms on which streets and tracks met. The evidence does not require us to deny the rail connection, or to claim that every inch of the old grounds can now be reconstructed with certainty. It asks for a smaller, more useful correction. The documented “Hump” was a name used for improvements at Broad and Lehigh; the alleged center-field rise is a disputed addition to that story. At Baker Bowl, the extraordinary feature was not necessarily under an outfielder’s feet. It was the crowded, changing ground on which the whole ballpark stood.

Share this story on Facebook ↗