document_title: 2002 Oakland Athletics season

question_text: who broke the oakland a's winning streak

question_tokens: who broke the oakland a 's winning streak

text: 2002 Oakland Athletics season

text: Off-season[edit]

text:
November 2, 2001: Mark Bellhorn was traded by the Oakland Athletics to the Chicago Cubs for Adam Morrissey (minors).[2]
December 14, 2001: David Justice was traded to the Oakland Athletics by the New York Mets for Mark Guthrie and Tyler Yates. This trade was preceded by a swap between the New York Mets and New York Yankees of Robin Ventura for Justice one week prior.[3]
January 11, 2002: Randy Velarde was signed as a free agent by the Oakland Athletics.[4]
March 19, 2002: Justin Duchscherer was traded by the Texas Rangers to the Oakland Athletics for Luis Vizcaíno.[5]

text: Regular season[edit]

text: Summary[edit]

text: Oakland's 2002 campaign began on a tumultuous note. During the 2001–02 offseason, the team lost three key free agents to larger market teams: 2000 AL MVP Jason Giambi to the New York Yankees, outfielder Johnny Damon to the Boston Red Sox, and closer Jason Isringhausen to the St. Louis Cardinals. Faced with a number of significant roster holes, general manager Billy Beane sought to replace Damon and Giambi with free agent hitters Scott Hatteberg, David Justice, and Ray Durham (among others). Beane also made a number of key pitching acquisitions; most notably, he traded for Toronto Blue Jays reliever Billy Koch. Koch ultimately succeeded Isringhausen as the team's closer. Beane also traded for then-unheralded starter Ted Lilly. Additionally, the season saw the MLB debuts of second baseman Mark Ellis and eventual starter Aaron Harang.

text: The new-look Athletics experienced a bumpy start to the 2002 regular season. The team followed a respectable 15-10 start with an abysmal 5-16 run; at the end of their slump, on May 23, the team's record stood at 20-26. From this point forward, the Athletics' fortunes improved significantly. In a prelude to the team's famous late-season winning streak, the Athletics went 16-1 from June 6 to June 24. The surge propelled the club within two games of first place. For now, this was as close as the team would get; a prolonged funk saw the A's play roughly .500 baseball for the next month-and-a-half. This period ended with an unremarkable 2-1 loss to the Toronto Blue Jays on August 12.

text: On August 13, the Athletics began their then-AL-record 20-game win streak. The streak's first win came courtesy of Barry Zito, who allowed three runs (one earned) over eight innings in a 5-4 victory over the Jays. Over the next several weeks, stellar pitching, hitting, and defense all played a significant role in the Athletics' surge. Most notable were the efforts of fourth starter Cory Lidle. During the month of August, Lidle went 5-0 while posting a scant 0.20 earned run average (he allowed one run his final start of the month); three of his five winning decisions fell within the confines of the streak. Even still, many of the Athletics' victories were by narrow margins; closer Billy Koch recorded either a win or save in twelve of the streak's twenty wins.

text: The Athletics' 18th and 19th wins came courtesy of Miguel Tejada game ending hits. On September 4, Oakland sought to win its 20th consecutive game; in doing so, the team hoped to break the 1947 New York Yankees' American League record of nineteen consecutive wins. The opponent was the Kansas City Royals. Over the first three innings of the game, Oakland shelled Kansas City pitchers Paul Byrd and Darrell May for a total of 11 runs while building a seemingly insurmountable 11-0 lead. Sloppy play down the stretch, however, allowed the Royals to score five runs apiece in the fourth and eighth innings. In the ninth, Billy Koch surrendered a two-out single to Royals pinch hitter Luis Alicea; the single allowed pinch runner Kit Pellow to score the tying run. As such, the Athletics entered the bottom of the ninth inning with the score tied at 11-11. In one of the most famous moments in Oakland Athletics history, pinch hitter Scott Hatteberg then hit a one-out solo home run off of Kansas City reliever Jason Grimsley. The home run clinched an AL-record 20th consecutive victory for the Athletics.

text: Oakland's streak came to an end with a 6-0 loss to the Minnesota Twins on September 5. The A's continued to play well down the stretch, as evidenced by their final record of 103-59. The club's late-season surge allowed it to hold off the Anaheim Angels, who finished only four games behind them at 99-63. Oakland's regular season exploits, however, once again failed to translate into postseason success. The team again lost the American League Division Series (this time to the Twins, who also ended the 20-game streak) in five games.

text: Shortstop Miguel Tejada and starting pitcher Barry Zito went on to win the American League MVP and Cy Young Award, respectively. Tejada himself left the Athletics following the 2003 season, while Zito lasted until the end of the 2006 campaign.

text: Game log[edit]

text:
[hide]2002 Game Log (103–59)[6]

April: 15–11 (Home: 10–6 ; Away: 5–5)[show]

#
Date
Opponent
Score
Win
Loss
Save
Attendance
Record
Streak

1
April 1
Rangers
8–3
Mulder (1–0)
Park (0–1)
—
43,908
1–0
W1

2
April 2
Rangers
3–2
Koch (1–0)
Miceli (0–1)
—
10,267
2–0
W2

3
April 3
Rangers
9–6
Mecir (1–0)
Rodriguez (0–1)
Koch (1)
23,259
3–0
W3

4
April 4
Rangers
5–7
Davis (1–0)
Lidle (0–1)
—
15,081
3–1
L1

5
April 5
@ Mariners
1–7
Baldwin (1–0)
Hiljus (0–1)
—
40,303
3–2
L2

6
April 6
@ Mariners
8–3
Mulder (2–0)
García (0–2)
—
45,093
4–2
W1

7
April 7
@ Mariners
6–5
Hudson (1–0)
Moyer (0–1)
Koch (2)
39,870
5–2
W2

8
April 9
@ Rangers
5–4 (11)
Koch (2–0)
Seánez (0–1)
—
20,158
6–2
W3

9
April 10
@ Rangers
2–4
Burba (1–0)
Lidle (0–2)
Rocker (1)
21,384
6–3
L1

10
April 11
@ Rangers
0–7
Davis (2–0)
Mulder (2–1)
—
21,903
6–4
L2

11
April 12
@ Angels
5–1
Hudson (2–0)
Ortiz (1–1)
—
31,815
7–4
W1

12
April 13
@ Angels
7–2
Hiljus (1–1)
Washburn (0–2)
—
33,554
8–4
W2

13
April 14
@ Angels
1–4
Appier (1–1)
Zito (0–1)
Levine (3)
32,881
8–5
L1

14
April 16
Mariners
2–6 (7)
Piñeiro (1–0)
Lidle (0–3)
—
13,022
8–6
L2

15
April 17
Mariners
4–7
Moyer (2–1)
Hudson (2–1)
Sasaki (4)
31,260
8–7
L3

16
April 18
Angels
4–2
Hiljus (2–1)
Ortiz (1–2)
Koch (3)
9,145
9–7
W1

17
April 19
Angels
7–9
Washburn (1–2)
Fyhrie (0–1)
Percival (2)
12,468
9–8
L1

18
April 20
Angels
8–7
Bradford (1–0)
Levine (1–1)
Koch (4)
20,253
10–8
W1

19
April 21
Angels
6–5
Venafro (1–0)
Percival (0–1)
—
20,088
11–8
W2

20
April 23
Yankees
1–2
Hernández (3–1)
Hudson (2–2)
Rivera (6)
40,360
11–9
L1

21
April 24
Yankees
5–8
Stanton (1–0)
Magnante (0–1)
Rivera (7)
54,513
11–10
L2

22
April 25
Yankees
6–2
Zito (1–1)
Mussina (3–1)
—
31,870
12–10
W1

23
April 26
White Sox
6–4
Lidle (1–3)
Parque (0–1)
Koch (5)
10,129
13–10
W2

24
April 27
White Sox
16–1
Fyhrie (1–1)
Buehrle (4–2)
—
26,111
14–10
W3

25
April 28
White Sox
10–0
Hudson (3–2)
Ritchie (2–2)
—
20,365
15–10
W4

26
April 30
@ Yankees
2–8
Wells (4–0)
Zito (1–2)
—
32,888
15–11
L1

May: 10–17 (Home: 5–7 ; Away: 5–10)[show]

#
Date
Opponent
Score
Win
Loss
Save
Attendance
Record
Streak

27
May 1
@ Yankees
4–1
Hiljus (3–1)
Mussina (3–2)
Koch (6)
31,006
16–11
W1

28
May 2
@ Yankees
2–9
Clemens (4–2)
Lidle (1–4)
—
30,463
16–12
L1

29
May 3
@ White Sox
1–6
Buehrle (5–2)
Fyhrie (1–2)
—
15,746
16–13
L2

30
May 4
@ White Sox
2–10
Ritchie (3–2)
Hudson (3–3)
—
27,511
16–14
L3

31
May 5
@ White Sox
3–2
Zito (2–2)
Wright (3–3)
Koch (7)
27,275
17–14
W1

32
May 7
Red Sox
7–9
Arrojo (2–0)
Mecir (1–1)
Urbina (12)
19,715
17–15
L1

33
May 8
Red Sox
6–12
Burkett (3–0)
Hiljus (3–2)
—
40,155
17–16
L2

34
May 9
Red Sox
1–5
Lowe (5–1)
Hudson (3–4)
—
18,477
17–17
L3

35
May 10
Blue Jays
2–6
Prokopec (2–4)
Mulder (2–2)
—
10,824
17–18
L4

36
May 11
Blue Jays
7–4
Zito (3–2)
Miller (2–1)
—
21,115
18–18
W1

37
May 12
Blue Jays
4–11
Halladay (3–1)
Lidle (1–5)
Walker (1)
19,519
18–19
L1

38
May 14
@ Red Sox
2–6
Burkett (4–0)
Hudson (3–5)
—
31,404
18–20
L2

39
May 15
@ Red Sox
2–8
Lowe (6–1)
Hiljus (3–3)
—
32,346
18–21
L3

40
May 16
@ Red Sox
5–0
Zito (4–2)
Castillo (2–4)
—
33,057
19–21
W1

41
May 17
@ Blue Jays
1–7
Halladay (4–1)
Mulder (2–3)
—
14,061
19–22
L1

42
May 18
@ Blue Jays
3–6
Miller (3–1)
Fyhrie (1–3)
Escobar (7)
17,846
19–23
L2

43
May 19
@ Blue Jays
0–11
Loaiza (2–0)
Hudson (3–6)
—
23,408
19–24
L3

44
May 21
Orioles
4–6 (14)
Driskill (1–0)
Venafro (1–1)
Julio (9)
10,245
19–25
L4

45
May 22
Orioles
7–6
Fyhrie (2–3)
Maduro (2–4)
Koch (8)
20,444
20–25
W1

46
May 23
Orioles
3–11
Ponson (3–3)
Mulder (2–4)
—
11,737
20–26
L1

47
May 24
Devil Rays
9–8
Mecir (2–1)
Zambrano (1–4)
Koch (9)
25,458
21–26
W1

48
May 25
Devil Rays
6–0
Harang (1–0)
Harper (1–2)
Bradford (1)
31,697
22–26
W2

49
May 26
Devil Rays
7–0
Zito (5–2)
Kennedy (1–2)
—
15,943
23–26
W3

50
May 28
@ Orioles
5–2
Mulder (3–4)
Maduro (2–5)
Koch (10)
24,825
24–26
W4

51
May 29
@ Orioles
5–10
Bauer (2–2)
Fyhrie (2–4)
—
24,913
24–27
L1

52
May 30
@ Devil Rays
3–4 (13)
Harper (2–2)
Bradford (1–1)
—
10,130
24–28
L2

53
May 31
@ Devil Rays
13–9
Venafro (2–1)
Yan (2–2)
—
10,227
25–28
W1

June: 21–7 (Home: 10–3 ; Away: 11–4)[show]

#
Date
Opponent
Score
Win
Loss
Save
Attendance
Record
Streak

54
June 1
@ Devil Rays
8–3
Zito (6–2)
Kennedy (3–5)
—
14,073
26–28
W2

55
June 2
@ Devil Rays
4–2
Mulder (4–4)
Rupe (5–6)
Koch (11)
10,563
27–28
W3

56
June 3
Mariners
1–4
García (7–4)
Harang (1–1)
Sasaki (13)
14,188
27–29
L1

57
June 4
Mariners
3–2 (10)
Koch (3–0)
Hasegawa (3–1)
—
13,528
28–29
W1

58
June 5
Mariners
0–5
Moyer (5–2)
Lidle (1–6)
—
35,647
28–30
L1

59
June 6
Mariners
10–4
Zito (7–2)
Baldwin (4–5)
—
27,344
29–30
W1

60
June 7
Astros
5–3
Mulder (5–4)
Oswalt (6–4)
Koch (12)
17,453
30–30
W2

61
June 8
Astros
5–1
Harang (2–1)
Reynolds (3–6)
—
27,115
31–30
W3

62
June 9
Astros
7–6
Koch (4–0)
Dotel (3–3)
—
35,065
32–30
W4

63
June 10
Brewers
8–6
Bradford (2–1)
de los Santos (1–2)
Koch (13)
10,584
33–30
W5

64
June 11
Brewers
11–2
Zito (8–2)
Figueroa (1–4)
—
11,223
34–30
W6

65
June 12
Brewers
8–0
Mulder (6–4)
Sheets (3–7)
—
20,847
35–30
W7

66
June 14
@ Giants
3–2
Hudson (4–6)
Schmidt (2–2)
Koch (14)
41,457
36–30
W8

67
June 15
@ Giants
2–6
Zerbe (2–0)
Harang (2–2)
—
41,298
36–31
L1

68
June 16
@ Giants
2–1
Zito (9–2)
Rueter (7–5)
Koch (15)
41,550
37–31
W1

69
June 18
@ Pirates
4–2
Mulder (7–4)
Fogg (7–5)
Koch (16)
21,943
38–31
W2

70
June 19
@ Pirates
3–2 (10)
Bradford (3–1)
Williams (1–2)
Koch (17)
30,562
39–31
W3

71
June 20
@ Pirates
5–3
Hudson (5–6)
Benson (0–4)
Koch (18)
22,464
40–31
W4

72
June 21
@ Reds
5–3
Harang (3–2)
Williamson (2–1)
Koch (19)
26,101
41–31
W5

73
June 22
@ Reds
10–3
Zito (10–2)
Chen (2–4)
—
27,243
42–31
W6

74
June 23
@ Reds
5–1
Mulder (8–4)
Reitsma (3–5)
—
23,961
43–31
W7

75
June 24
@ Mariners
13–2
Lidle (2–6)
García (10–5)
—
45,602
44–31
W8

76
June 25
@ Mariners
1–7
Baldwin (6–6)
Hudson (5–7)
—
43,985
44–32
L1

77
June 26
@ Mariners
0–1
Hasegawa (4–1)
Bradford (3–2)
Sasaki (18)
42,120
44–33
L2

78
June 27
@ Mariners
4–7
Halama (3–2)
Zito (10–3)
Rhodes (1)
42,159
44–34
L3

79
June 28
Giants
10–6
Mulder (9–4)
Hernández (6–9)
—
46,345
45–34
W1

80
June 29
Giants
3–5
Schmidt (4–2)
Lidle (2–7)
Nen (21)
53,501
45–35
L1

81
June 30
Giants
7–0
Hudson (6–7)
Ortiz (6–5)
—
54,123
46–35
W1

July: 15–12 (Home: 8–7 ; Away: 7–5)[show]

#
Date
Opponent
Score
Win
Loss
Save
Attendance
Record
Streak

82
July 1
Twins
4–5
Romero (4–1)
Venafro (2–2)
Guardado (25)
13,503
46–36
L1

83
July 2
Twins
4–3
Bradford (4–2)
Guardado (1–2)
—
15,317
47–36
W1

84
July 3
Twins
1–2
Santana (4–1)
Mulder (9–5)
Guardado (26)
30,213
47–37
L1

85
July 4
Royals
3–2
Koch (5–0)
Hernández (1–1)
—
28,315
48–37
W1

86
July 5
Royals
4–3
Mecir (3–1)
Hernández (1–2)
—
53,802
49–37
W2

87
July 6
Royals
3–4 (10)
Mullen (1–2)
Koch (5–1)
Voyles (1)
18,259
49–38
L1

88
July 7
Royals
3–2
Zito (11–3)
Byrd (11–6)
Koch (20)
31,676
50–38
W1

All–Star Break (July 8–10)

89
July 11
@ Orioles
4–1
Mulder (10–5)
Erickson (3–9)
Koch (21)
32,507
51–38
W2

90
July 12
@ Orioles
1–0
Hudson (7–7)
Johnson (3–6)
Koch (22)
33,366
52–38
W3

91
July 13
@ Orioles
6–0
Zito (12–3)
Driskill (6–2)
—
36,100
53–38
W4

92
July 14
@ Orioles
3–6
López (9–3)
Lidle (2–8)
Julio (18)
32,853
53–39
L1

93
July 15
@ Devil Rays
4–0
Lilly (4–6)
Rupe (5–10)
—
10,116
54–39
W1

94
July 16
@ Devil Rays
2–1
Mulder (11–5)
Sosa (0–2)
Koch (23)
10,592
55–39
W2

95
July 17
Angels
4–10
Appier (8–7)
Hudson (7–8)
—
38,547
55–40
L1

96
July 18
Angels
2–0
Zito (13–3)
Sele (7–7)
Koch (24)
15,733
56–40
W1

97
July 19
Rangers
10–0
Lidle (3–8)
Myette (0–1)
—
21,445
57–40
W2

98
July 20
Rangers
6–5
Koch (6–1)
Burba (4–5)
—
31,129
58–40
W3

99
July 21
Rangers
3–7 (12)
Powell (2–1)
Mecir (3–2)
—
27,567
58–41
L1

100
July 23
@ Angels
2–1
Zito (14–3)
Appier (8–8)
Koch (25)
25,370
59–41
W1

101
July 24
@ Angels
1–5
Sele (8–7)
Hudson (7–9)
—
25,240
59–42
L1

102
July 25
@ Angels
4–5
Shields (3–1)
Mecir (3–3)
Weber (5)
31,653
59–43
L2

103
July 26
@ Rangers
4–12
Rodriguez (1–1)
Mulder (11–6)
—
34,585
59–44
L3

104
July 27
@ Rangers
6–10 (10)
Kolb (1–0)
Koch (6–2)
—
35,359
59–45
L4

105
July 28
@ Rangers
12–2
Zito (15–3)
Alvarez (0–3)
—
24,022
60–45
W1

106
July 29
Indians
6–8
Mulholland (1–0)
Magnante (0–2)
Wohlers (1)
18,297
60–46
L1

107
July 30
Indians
4–5
Drese (9–8)
Lidle (3–9)
Wohlers (2)
14,737
60–47
L2

108
July 31
Indians
6–4
Mulder (12–6)
Westbrook (0–1)
Koch (26)
47,574
61–47
W1

August: 24–4 (Home: 10–2 ; Away: 14–2)[show]

#
Date
Opponent
Score
Win
Loss
Save
Attendance
Record
Streak

109
August 1
Tigers
5–3
Bowie (1–0)
Sparks (5–11)
Koch (27)
13,861
62–47
W2

110
August 2
Tigers
1–3
Redman (7–9)
Zito (15–4)
Acevedo (19)
17,197
62–48
L1

111
August 3
Tigers
8–4
Hudson (8–9)
Lima (2–5)
—
29,648
63–48
W1

112
August 4
Tigers
4–0
Lidle (4–9)
Maroth (3–4)
—
24,546
64–48
W2

113
August 6
@ Red Sox
9–1
Mulder (13–6)
Wakefield (5–4)
—
34,059
65–48
W3

114
August 7
@ Red Sox
3–2
Harang (4–2)
Burkett (10–5)
Koch (28)
33,325
66–48
W4

115
August 8
@ Red Sox
2–4
Lowe (16–5)
Zito (15–5)
Urbina (26)
33,855
66–49
L1

116
August 9
@ Yankees
3–2 (16)
Bowie (2–0)
Hitchcock (1–1)
—
54,316
67–49
W1

117
August 10
@ Yankees
8–0
Lidle (5–9)
Wells (12–6)
—
54,439
68–49
W2

118
August 11
@ Yankees
5–8
Mussina (14–6)
Mulder (13–7)
—
54,703
68–50
L1

119
August 12
Blue Jays
1–2
Loaiza (5–6)
Harang (4–3)
Escobar (24)
14,178
68–51
L2

120
August 13
Blue Jays
5–4
Zito (16–5)
Carpenter (4–5)
Koch (29)
17,466
69–51
W1

121
August 14
Blue Jays
4–2
Hudson (9–9)
Walker (5–3)
Koch (30)
40,528
70–51
W2

122
August 16
White Sox
1–0
Lidle (6–9)
Buehrle (15–9)
Koch (31)
22,622
71–51
W3

123
August 17
White Sox
9–2
Mulder (14–7)
Garland (8–9)
—
40,658
72–51
W4

124
August 18
White Sox
7–4
Zito (17–5)
Wright (8–11)
—
31,489
73–51
W5

125
August 19
@ Indians
8–1
Hudson (10–9)
Báez (9–10)
—
27,696
74–51
W6

126
August 20
@ Indians
6–3
Harang (5–3)
Westbrook (1–2)
Koch (32)
27,527
75–51
W7

127
August 21
@ Indians
6–0
Lidle (7–9)
Rodríguez (0–1)
—
26,916
76–51
W8

128
August 22
@ Indians
9–3
Mulder (15–7)
Phillips (1–2)
Bradford (2)
27,759
77–51
W9

129
August 23
@ Tigers
9–1
Zito (18–5)
Powell (1–3)
—
21,807
78–51
W10

130
August 24
@ Tigers
12–3
Hudson (11–9)
Lima (4–6)
—
19,045
79–51
W11

131
August 25
@ Tigers
10–7
Mecir (4–3)
Walker (1–1)
Koch (33)
24,346
80–51
W12

132
August 26
@ Royals
6–3
Lidle (8–9)
May (3–9)
Koch (34)
11,096
81–51
W13

133
August 27
@ Royals
6–4
Mulder (16–7)
Hernández (3–3)
Koch (35)
13,077
82–51
W14

134
August 28
@ Royals
7–1
Zito (19–5)
Sedlacek (3–4)
—
15,952
83–51
W15

135
August 30
Twins
4–2
Hudson (12–9)
Radke (6–4)
Koch (36)
25,221
84–51
W16

136
August 31
Twins
6–3
Mecir (5–3)
Romero (8–2)
Koch (37)
42,841
85–51
W17

September: 18–8 (Home: 11–2 ; Away: 7–6)[show]

#
Date
Opponent
Score
Win
Loss
Save
Attendance
Record
Streak

137
September 1
Twins
7–5
Koch (7–2)
Guardado (1–3)
—
37,676
86–51
W18

138
September 2
Royals
7–6
Koch (8–2)
Grimsley (3–5)
—
26,325
87–51
W19

139
September 4
Royals
12–11
Koch (9–2)
Grimsley (3–6)
—
55,528
88–51
W20

140
September 6
@ Twins
0–6
Radke (7–4)
Lidle (8–10)
—
27,409
88–52
L1

141
September 7
@ Twins
2–0
Mulder (17–7)
Mays (3–6)
Koch (38)
43,628
89–52
W1

142
September 8
@ Twins
6–0
Zito (20–5)
Milton (13–8)
—
20,102
90–52
W2

143
September 9
@ Angels
2–1
Hudson (13–9)
Appier (14–10)
Koch (39)
28,145
91–52
W3

144
September 10
@ Angels
2–5
Ortiz (13–9)
Lilly (4–7)
Percival (36)
35,323
91–53
L1

145
September 11
@ Angels
5–6
Shields (4–3)
Tam (0–1)
Percival (37)
34,302
91–54
L2

146
September 12
@ Angels
6–7
Donnelly (1–1)
Koch (9–3)
—
31,304
91–55
L3

147
September 13
Mariners
5–0
Zito (21–5)
Valdez (8–11)
—
38,210
92–55
W1

148
September 14
Mariners
1–0
Hudson (14–9)
Moyer (13–8)
—
40,309
93–55
W2

149
September 15
Mariners
3–6
Piñeiro (14–6)
Harang (5–4)
Sasaki (35)
38,783
93–56
L1

150
September 16
Angels
4–3
Koch (10–3)
Levine (4–4)
—
22,326
94–56
W1

151
September 17
Angels
0–1 (10)
Weber (7–2)
Koch (10–4)
Percival (40)
25,894
94–57
L1

152
September 18
Angels
7–4
Zito (22–5)
Callaway (1–1)
Koch (40)
50,730
95–57
W1

153
September 19
Angels
5–3
Hudson (15–9)
Appier (14–11)
Koch (41)
27,435
96–57
W2

154
September 20
Rangers
4–2
Mecir (6–3)
Kolb (3–5)
Rincón (1)
25,281
97–57
W3

155
September 21
Rangers
6–3
Tam (1–1)
Nitkowski (0–1)
Koch (42)
24,862
98–57
W4

156
September 22
Rangers
7–5
Mulder (18–7)
Park (9–7)
Koch (43)
35,697
99–57
W5

157
September 24
@ Mariners
7–8
Hasegawa (8–2)
Tam (1–2)
Rhodes (2)
39,037
99–58
L1

158
September 25
@ Mariners
2–3
Rhodes (10–4)
Mecir (6–4)
Sasaki (37)
39,776
99–59
L2

159
September 26
@ Mariners
5–3 (10)
Koch (11–4)
Hasegawa (8–3)
—
45,822
100–59
W1

160
September 27
@ Rangers
3–2
Mulder (19–7)
Park (9–8)
Koch (44)
31,521
101–59
W2

161
September 28
@ Rangers
10–8
Lilly (5–7)
Kolb (3–6)
Mecir (1)
44,442
102–59
W3

162
September 29
@ Rangers
8–7
Zito (23–5)
Benoit (4–5)
—
34,529
103–59
W4

Legend:           = Win           = Loss           = Postponement
Bold = Athletics team member

text: Season standings[edit]

text:
v
t
e

AL West
W
L
Pct.
GB
Home
Road

Oakland Athletics
103
59
0.636
—
54–27
49–32

Anaheim Angels
99
63
0.611
4
54–27
45–36

Seattle Mariners
93
69
0.574
10
48–33
45–36

Texas Rangers
72
90
0.444
31
42–39
30–51

text: American League Wild Card[edit]

text:
v
t
e

Division Leaders
W
L
Pct.

New York Yankees
103
58
0.640

Minnesota Twins
94
67
0.584

Oakland Athletics
103
59
0.636

text:
v
t
e

W
L
Pct.

Anaheim Angels
99
63
0.611

Boston Red Sox
93
69
0.574

Seattle Mariners
93
69
0.574

Chicago White Sox
81
81
0.500

Toronto Blue Jays
78
84
0.481

Cleveland Indians
74
88
0.457

Texas Rangers
72
90
0.444

Baltimore Orioles
67
95
0.414

Kansas City Royals
62
100
0.383

Detroit Tigers
55
106
0.342

Tampa Bay Devil Rays
55
106
0.342

text: Record vs. opponents[edit]

text:
2002 American League Records

v
t
e

Sources:
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14]

Team
ANA
BAL
BOS
CWS
CLE
DET
KC
MIN
NYY
OAK
SEA
TB
TEX
TOR
NL

Anaheim
—
7–2
3–4
6–3
6–3
8–1
6–3
4–5
3–4
9–11
9–10
8–1
12–7
7–2
11–7

Baltimore
2–7
—
6–13
3–4
1–5
2–4
7–0
5–1
6–13
4–5
5–4
10–9
3–6
4–15
9–9

Boston
4–3
13–6
—
2–4
5–4
5–4
4–2
3–3
9–10
6–3
4–5
16–3
4–3
13–6
5–13

Chicago
3–6
4–3
4–2
—
9–10
12–7
11–8
8–11
2–4
2–7
5–4
4–3
5–4
4–2
8–10

Cleveland
3–6
5–1
4–5
10–9
—
10–9
9–10
8–11
3–6
2–5
3–4
4–2
4–5
3–3
6–12

Detroit
1–8
4–2
4–5
7–12
9–10
—
9–10
4–14
1–8
1–6
2–5
2–4
5–4
0–6
6–12

Kansas City
3–6
0–7
2–4
8–11
10–9
10–9
—
5–14
1–5
1–8
3–6
4–2
7–2
3–4
5–13

Minnesota
5–4
1–5
3–3
11–8
11–8
14–4
14–5
—
0–6
3–6
5–4
5–2
6–3
6–1
10–8

New York
4–3
13–6
10–9
4–2
6–3
8–1
5–1
6–0
—
5–4
4–5
13–5
4–3
10–9
11–7

Oakland
11–9
5–4
3–6
7–2
5–2
6–1
8–1
6–3
4–5
—
8–11
8–1
13–6
3–6
16–2

Seattle
10–9
4–5
5–4
4–5
4–3
5–2
6–3
4–5
5–4
11–8
—
5–4
13–7
6–3
11–7

Tampa Bay
1–8
9–10
3–16
3–4
2–4
4–2
2–4
2–5
5–13
1–8
4–5
—
4–5
8–11
7–11

Texas
7–12
6–3
3–4
4–5
5–4
4–5
2–7
3–6
3–4
6–13
7–13
5–4
—
8–1
9–9

Toronto
2–7
15–4
6–13
2–4
3–3
6–0
4–3
1–6
9–10
6–3
3–6
11–8
1–8
—
9–9

text: Draft picks[edit]

text:
June 4, 2002: Nick Swisher was drafted by the Oakland Athletics in the 1st round (16th pick, compensatory) of the 2002 amateur draft.
June 4, 2002: Joe Blanton was drafted by the Oakland Athletics in the 1st round (24th pick, compensatory) of the amateur draft.
June 4, 2002: John McCurdy was drafted by the Oakland Athletics in the 1st round (26th pick) of the amateur draft.
June 4, 2002: Benjamin Fritz was drafted by the Oakland Athletics in the 1st round (30th pick, compensatory) of the amateur draft.
June 4, 2002: Jeremy Brown was drafted by the Oakland Athletics in the 1st round (35th pick, compensatory) of the amateur draft.
June 4, 2002: Mark Teahen was drafted by the Oakland Athletics in the 1st round (39th pick, compensatory) of the amateur draft.

text: Trades[edit]

text:
May 22, 2002: John Mabry was traded by the Philadelphia Phillies to the Oakland Athletics for Jeremy Giambi.[7]
June 21, 2002: Bob Ryan was traded to the Boston Red Sox for cash considerations.[7]
July 5, 2002: Jeff Weaver was traded by the Detroit Tigers to the New York Yankees, and cash was sent by the Tigers to the Oakland Athletics, as part of a 3-team trade. The Athletics sent Carlos Peña, Franklyn Germán, and a player to be named later to the Tigers. The Yankees sent Ted Lilly, John-Ford Griffin, and Jason Arnold (minors) to the Athletics. The Athletics completed the trade by sending Jeremy Bonderman to the Tigers on August 22, 2002.[8]
July 25, 2002: Ray Durham was traded by the Chicago White Sox to the Oakland Athletics with cash for Jon Adkins.[9]
July 30, 2002: Ricardo Rincón was traded by the Cleveland Indians to the Oakland Athletics for Marshall McDougall.[7]

text: Roster[edit]

text:
2002 Oakland Athletics

Roster

Pitchers

57 Micah Bowie
53 Chad Bradford
49 Mike Fyhrie
56 Aaron Harang
37 Erik Hiljus
31 Mike Holtz
15 Tim Hudson
44 Billy Koch
21 Cory Lidle
31 Ted Lilly
52 Mike Magnante
45 Jim Mecir
20 Mark Mulder
73 Ricardo Rincón
29 Jeff Tam
33 Mike Venafro
75 Barry Zito

Catchers

 2 Jason Grabowski
55 Ramón Hernández
26 Cody McKay
28 Greg Myers

Infielders

 3 Eric Chavez
 5 Ray Durham
14 Mark Ellis
30 Jose Flores
40 Esteban Germán
10 Scott Hatteberg
11 Frank Menechino
 2 Carlos Peña
 9 Olmedo Sáenz
19 Larry Sutton
 4 Miguel Tejada
 8 Randy Velarde

Outfielders

22 Eric Byrnes
30 Mike Colangelo
24 Jermaine Dye
 7 Jeremy Giambi
23 David Justice
12 Terrence Long
47 John Mabry
 6 Adam Piatt

Manager

18 Art Howe

Coaches

41 Thad Bosley (Hitting)
35 Brad Fischer (Bullpen)
39 Ken Macha (Bench)
47 Rick Peterson (Pitching)
48 Mike Quade (First Base)
38 Ron Washington (Third Base)

text: Postseason[edit]

text: The Athletics clinched the American League West with a regular season record of 103–59, advancing to the first round of the postseason. They were defeated in the 2002 American League Division Series three games to two by the American League Central champion Minnesota Twins,[10] who would be defeated in the 2002 American League Championship Series by the eventual World Series champion Anaheim Angels.

text: Postseason game log[edit]

text:
[hide]2002 Postseason Game Log (2–3)[10]

2002 AL Division Series vs. Minnesota Twins: Athletics lose 2–3[show]

#
Date
Opponent
Score
Win
Loss
Save
Attendance
Series

1
October 1
Twins
5–7
Radke (1–0)
Lilly (0–1)
Guardado (1)
34,853
MIN 1–0

2
October 2
Twins
9–1
Mulder (1–0)
Mays (0–1)
—
31,953
Tied 1–1

3
October 4
@ Twins
6–3
Zito (1–0)
Reed (0–1)
Koch (1)
55,932
OAK 2–1

4
October 5
@ Twins
2–11
Milton (1–0)
Hudson (0–1)
—
55,960
Tied 2–2

5
October 6
Twins
4–5
Radke (2–0)
Mulder (1–1)
—
32,146
MIN 3–2

Legend:           = Win           = Loss           = Postponement
Bold = Athletics team member

text: Player statistics[edit]

text: Pitching[edit]

text:
Player
POS
G
IP
W
L
SV
ERA
SO

Tim Hudson
SP
34
238.1
15
9
0
2.98
152

Barry Zito
SP
35
229.1
23
5
0
2.75
182

Mark Mulder
SP
30
207.1
19
7
0
3.47
159

Cory Lidle
SP
31
192.0
8
10
0
3.89
111

Aaron Harang
SP
16
78.1
5
4
0
4.83
64

Billy Koch
CP
84
93.2
11
4
44
3.27
93

Chad Bradford
RP
75
75.1
4
2
2
3.11
56

Jim Mecir
RP
61
67.2
6
4
1
4.26
53

Jeff Tam
RP
40
40.1
1
2
0
5.13
14

Mike Venafro
RP
47
37.0
2
2
0
4.62
16

Mike Fyhrie
RP/SP
16
48.2
2
4
0
4.44
29

Erik Hiljus
RP/SP
9
45.2
3
3
0
6.50
29

Mike Magnante
RP
32
28.2
0
2
0
5.97
11

Ted Lilly
RP/SP
6
23.1
2
1
0
4.63
18

Ricardo Rincón
RP
25
20.1
0
0
1
3.10
19

Mike Holtz
RP
16
14.0
0
0
0
6.43
7

Micah Bowie
RP
13
12.0
2
0
0
1.50
8

Totals
1452.0
103
59
48
3.68
1021

AL Ranking / 14
2
1
13
4
1
7

text: Batting[edit]

text:
Player
POS
G
AB
AVG
OBP
H
2B
3B
HR
RBI

Ramón Hernández
C
136
403
.233
.313
94
20
0
7
42

Scott Hatteberg
1B
136
492
.280
.374
138
22
4
15
61

Mark Ellis
2B
98
345
.272
.359
94
16
4
6
35

Eric Chavez
3B
153
585
.275
.348
161
31
3
34
109

Miguel Tejada
SS
162
662
.308
.354
204
30
0
34
131

David Justice
LF
118
398
.266
.376
106
18
3
11
49

Terrence Long
CF
162
587
.240
.298
141
32
4
16
67

Jermaine Dye
RF
131
488
.252
.333
123
27
1
24
86

Ray Durham
DH
54
219
.274
.350
60
14
4
6
22

John Mabry
LF
89
193
.275
.322
53
13
1
11
40

Jeremy Giambi
LF
42
157
.274
.390
43
7
0
8
17

Olmedo Sáenz
1B
68
156
.276
.354
43
10
1
6
18

Greg Myers
C
65
144
.222
.341
32
5
0
6
21

Randy Velarde
2B
56
133
.226
.325
30
8
0
2
8

Frank Menechino
2B
38
132
.312
.312
27
7
0
3
15

Adam Piatt
LF
55
137
.234
.303
32
8
0
5
18

Carlos Peña
1B
40
124
.218
.305
27
4
0
7
16

Eric Byrnes
UT
90
94
.245
.291
23
4
2
3
11

Esteban Germán
2B
9
35
.200
.300
7
0
0
0
0

Mike Colangelo
OF
20
23
.174
.240
4
1
0
0
0

Larry Sutton
UT
7
19
.105
.150
2
0
0
1
3

Jason Grabowski
LF
4
8
.375
.545
3
1
1
0
1

Jose Flores
UT
7
3
.000
.400
0
0
0
0
0

Cody McKay
C
2
3
.667
.500
2
0
0
0
2

Barry Zito
P
35
4
.000
.000
0
0
0
0
0

Tim Hudson
P
34
5
.200
.333
1
1
0
0
0

Mark Mulder
P
30
5
.000
.000
0
0
0
0
0

Aaron Harang
P
16
3
.000
.000
0
0
0
0
0

Cory Lidle
P
31
1
.000
.000
0
0
0
0
0

Totals
5558
.261
.339
1450
279
28
205
772

AL Ranking / 14
9
8
5
9
12
10
4
—

text: Note: Only players with at least one at-bat are listed.

text: Farm system[edit]

text: Baseball portal

text:
Level
Team
League
Manager

AAA
Sacramento RiverCats
Pacific Coast League
Bob Geren

AA
Midland RockHounds
Texas League
Tony DeFrancesco

A
Modesto A's
California League
Greg Sparks

A
Visalia Oaks
California League
Webster Garrison

A-Short Season
Vancouver Canadians
Northwest League
Orv Franchuk

Rookie
AZL Athletics
Arizona League
Ruben Escalera


document_title: High-speed steel

question_text: the percentage of carbon in high speed steel is

root

text: High-speed steel

text: History[edit]

text: Although development of modern high speed steel began in the second half of the 19th century, there is documented evidence of steels produced earlier with similar content. These include hardened steels in China in 13th century BC, wootz steel manufactured in India around 350 BC and production of Damascus and Japanese layered steel blades in years 540 AD and 900 AD.[1] High-speed properties of those steels would be mostly coincidental (as no machining technology that involved quantification of speeds and feeds existed at the time) and would be the result of local iron ores containing natural traces of tungsten or other favorable alloying components.

tag: p

text: In 1868 the English metallurgist Robert Forester Mushet developed Mushet steel, considered to be the forerunner of modern high speed steels. It consisted of 2% carbon (C), 2.5% manganese (Mn), and 7% tungsten (W). The major advantage of this steel was that it hardened when air cooled from a temperature at which most steels had to be quenched for hardening. Over the next 30 years the most significant change was the replacement of manganese (Mn) with chromium (Cr).[2]

text: In 1899 and 1900, Frederick Winslow Taylor and Maunsel White, working with a team of assistants at the Bethlehem Steel Company at Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, US, performed a series of experiments with the heat treating of existing high-quality tool steels, such as Mushet steel, heating them to much higher temperatures than were typically considered desirable in the industry.[3][4] Their experiments were characterised by a scientific empiricism in that many different combinations were made and tested, with no regard for conventional wisdom or alchemic recipes, and with detailed records kept of each batch. The end result was a heat treatment process that transformed existing alloys into a new kind of steel that could retain its hardness at higher temperatures, allowing much higher speeds and rate of cutting when machining.

text: The Taylor-White process[5] was patented and created a revolution in the machining industries. Heavier machine tools with higher rigidity were needed to use the new steel to its full advantage, prompting redesigns and replacement of installed plant. The patent was hotly contested and eventually nullified.[6]

text: The first alloy that was formally classified as high-speed steel is known by the AISI designation T1, which was introduced in 1910.[1] It was patented by Crucible Steel Co. at the beginning of the 20th century.[2]

text: Although molybdenum-rich high-speed steels such as AISI M1 have been used since the 1930s, material shortages and high costs caused by World War II spurred development of less expensive alloys substituting molybdenum for tungsten. The advances in molybdenum-based high speed steel during this period put them on par with and in certain cases better than tungsten-based high speed steels. This started with the use of M2 steel instead of T1 steel.[2][7]

text: Types[edit]

text: This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

tag: table

text: High speed steels are alloys that gain their properties from either tungsten or molybdenum, often with a combination of the two. They belong to the Fe–C–X multi-component alloy system where X represents chromium, tungsten, molybdenum, vanadium, or cobalt. Generally, the X component is present in excess of 7%, along with more than 0.60% carbon. The alloying element percentages do not alone bestow the hardness-retaining properties; they also require appropriate high-temperature heat treatment to become true HSS; see History above.

text: In the unified numbering system (UNS), tungsten-type grades (e.g. T1, T15) are assigned numbers in the T120xx series, while molybdenum (e.g. M2, M48) and intermediate types are T113xx. ASTM standards recognize 7 tungsten types and 17 molybdenum types.[8]

text: The addition of about 10% of tungsten and molybdenum in total maximises efficiently the hardness and toughness of high speed steels and maintains those properties at the high temperatures generated when cutting metals.

text:
A sample of alloying compositions of common high speed steel grades (by %wt)[9][10] (impurity limits are not included)

Grade
C
Cr
Mo
W
V
Co
Mn
Si

T1
0.65–0.80
4.00
-
18
1
-
0.1–0.4
0.2–0.4

M1
0.80
4
8
1.5
1.0
-
-
-

M2
0.95
4
5
6.0
2.0
-
-
-

M7
1.00
4
8.75
1.75
2.0
-
-
-

M35
0.92
4.3
5
6.4
1.8
5
-
0.35

M42
1.10
3.75
9.5
1.5
1.15
8.0
-
-

M50
0.85
4
4.25
.10
1.0
-
-
-

text: Tungsten Steels[edit]

text: Molybdenum High Speed Steels (HSS)[edit]

text: Adding molybdenum, tungsten and chromium steel creates several alloys commonly called "HSS", measuring 63-65 Rockwell hardness.

text: Cobalt High Speed Steels (HSS)[edit]

text: The addition of cobalt increases heat resistance, and can give a Rockwell hardness up to 67 Min..

text: Coatings[edit]

text: This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: The life of high-speed steel can be prolonged by coating the tool . One such coating is TiN (titanium nitride). Most coatings generally increase a tool's hardness and/or lubricity. A coating allows the cutting edge of a tool to cleanly pass through the material without having the material gall (stick) to it. The coating also helps to decrease the temperature associated with the cutting process and increase the life of the tool.

text: Surface modification[edit]

text: Lasers and electron beams can be used as sources of intense heat at the surface for heat treatment, remelting (glazing), and compositional modification. It is possible to achieve different molten pool shapes and temperatures. Cooling rates range from 103 to 106 K s−1. Beneficially, there is little or no cracking or porosity formation.[2]

text: While the possibilities of heat treating at the surface should be readily apparent, the other applications beg some explanation. At cooling rates in excess of 106 K s−1 eutectic microconstituents disappear and there is extreme segregation of substitutional alloying elements. This has the effect of providing the benefits of a glazed part without the associated run in wear damage.[2]

text: The alloy composition of a part or tool can also be changed to form a high speed steel on the surface of a lean alloy or to form an alloy or carbide enriched layer on the surface of a high speed steel part. Several methods can be used such as foils, pack boronising, plasma spray powders, powder cored strips, inert gas blow feeders, etc. Although this method has been reported to be both beneficial and stable, it has yet to see widespread commercial use.[2]

text: Applications[edit]

text: The main use of high-speed steels continues to be in the manufacture of various cutting tools: drills, taps, milling cutters, tool bits, gear cutters, saw blades, planer and jointer blades, router bits, etc., although usage for punches and dies is increasing.

text: High speed steels also found a market in fine hand tools where their relatively good toughness at high hardness, coupled with high abrasion resistance, made them suitable for low speed applications requiring a durable keen (sharp) edge, such as files, chisels, hand plane blades, and damascus kitchen knives and pocket knives.

text: High speed steel tools are the most popular for use in woodturning, as the speed of movement of the work past the edge is relatively high for handheld tools, and HSS holds its edge far longer than high carbon steel tools can.


document_title: Mantis

question_text: what are the enemies of the praying mantis

text: Mantis

text: Taxonomy and evolution

text: Over 2,400 species of mantis in about 430 genera are recognized.[1] They are predominantly found in tropical regions, but some live in temperate areas.[2][3] The systematics of mantises have long been disputed. Mantises, along with stick insects (Phasmatodea), were once placed in the order Orthoptera with the cockroaches (now Blattodea) and rock crawlers (now Grylloblattodea). Kristensen (1991) combined the Mantodea with the cockroaches and termites into the order Dictyoptera, suborder Mantodea.[4][5] The name mantodea is formed from the Ancient Greek words μάντις (mantis) meaning "prophet", and εἶδος (eidos) meaning "form" or "type". It was coined in 1838 by the German entomologist Hermann Burmeister.[6][7] The order is occasionally called the mantes, using a Latinized plural of Greek mantis. The name mantid properly refers only to members of the family Mantidae, which was, historically, the only family in the order. The other common name, praying mantis, applied to any species in the order,[8] (though in Europe mainly to Mantis religiosa), comes from the typical "prayer-like" posture with folded fore limbs.[9][10] The vernacular plural "mantises" (used in this article) was confined largely to the USA, with "mantids" predominantly used as the plural in the UK and elsewhere, until the family Mantidae was further split in 2002.[11][12]

text: One of the earliest classifications splitting an all-inclusive Mantidae into multiple families was that proposed by Beier in 1968, recognizing eight families[13], though it was not until Ehrmann's reclassification into 15 families in 2002[12] that a multiple-family classification became universally adopted. Klass, in 1997, studied the external male genitalia and postulated that the families Chaeteessidae and Metallyticidae diverged from the other families at an early date.[14] However, the Mantidae and Thespidae are still both considered polyphyletic, so the Mantodea will have to be revised.[15]

text: The earliest mantis fossils are about 135 million years old, from Siberia.[15] Fossils of the group are rare: by 2007, only about 25 fossil species were known.[15] Fossil mantises, including one from Japan with spines on the front legs as in modern mantises, have been found in Cretaceous amber.[16] Most fossils in amber are nymphs; compression fossils (in rock) include adults. Fossil mantises from the Crato Formation in Brazil include the 10 mm (0.39 in) long Santanmantis axelrodi, described in 2003; as in modern mantises, the front legs were adapted for catching prey. Well-preserved specimens yield details as small as 5 μm through X-ray computed tomography.[15]

text: Because of the superficially similar raptorial forelegs, mantidflies may be confused with mantises, though they are unrelated. Their similarity is an example of convergent evolution; mantidflies do not have tegmina (leathery forewings) like mantises, their antennae are shorter and less thread-like, and the raptorial tibia is more muscular than that of a similar-sized mantis and bends back further in preparation for shooting out to grasp prey.[17]

text: Biology

text: Anatomy

text: Mantises have large, triangular heads with a beak-like snout and mandibles. They have two bulbous compound eyes, three small simple eyes, and a pair of antennae. The articulation of the neck is also remarkably flexible; some species of mantis can rotate their heads nearly 180°.[10] The mantis thorax consists of a prothorax, a mesothorax, and a metathorax. In all species apart from the genus Mantoida, the prothorax, which bears the head and forelegs, is much longer than the other two thoracic segments. The prothorax is also flexibly articulated, allowing for a wide range of movements of the head and fore limbs while the remainder of the body remains more or less immobile.[18][19]

text: Mantises have two spiked, grasping forelegs ("raptorial legs") in which prey items are caught and held securely. In most insect legs, including the posterior four legs of a mantis, the coxa and trochanter combine as an inconspicuous base of the leg; in the raptorial legs, however, the coxa and trochanter combine to form a segment about as long as the femur, which is a spiky part of the grasping apparatus (see illustration). Located at the base of the femur is a set of discoidal spines, usually four in number, but ranging from none to as many as five depending on the species. These spines are preceded by a number of tooth-like tubercles, which, along with a similar series of tubercles along the tibia and the apical claw near its tip, give the foreleg of the mantis its grasp on its prey. The foreleg ends in a delicate tarsus used as a walking appendage, made of four or five segments and ending in a two-toed claw with no arolium.[18][20]

text: Mantises can be loosely categorized as being macropterous (long-winged), brachypterous (short-winged), micropterous (vestigial-winged), or apterous (wingless). If not wingless, a mantis has two sets of wings: the outer wings, or tegmina, are usually narrow and leathery. They function as camouflage and as a shield for the hind wings, which are clearer and more delicate.[18][21] The abdomen of all mantises consists of 10 tergites, with a corresponding set of nine sternites visible in males and seven visible in females. The abdomen tends to be slimmer in males than females, but ends in a pair of cerci in both sexes.[18]

text: Vision

text: Mantises have stereo vision.[22][23][24] They locate their prey by sight; their compound eyes contain up to 10,000 ommatidia. A small area at the front called the fovea has greater visual acuity than the rest of the eye, and can produce the high resolution necessary to examine potential prey. The peripheral ommatidia are concerned with perceiving motion; when a moving object is noticed, the head is rapidly rotated to bring the object into the visual field of the fovea. Further motions of the prey are then tracked by movements of the mantis's head so as to keep the image centered on the fovea.[20][25] The eyes are widely spaced and laterally situated, affording a wide binocular field of vision and precise stereoscopic vision at close range.[26] The dark spot on each eye that moves as it rotates its head is a pseudopupil. This occurs because the ommatidia that are viewed "head-on" absorb the incident light, while those to the side reflect it.[27]

text: As their hunting relies heavily on vision, mantises are primarily diurnal. Many species, however, fly at night, and then may be attracted to artificial lights. Mantises in the family Liturgusidae collected at night have been shown to be predominately males;[28] this is probably true for most mantises. Nocturnal flight is especially important to males in locating less-mobile females by detecting their pheromones. Flying at night exposes mantises to fewer bird predators than diurnal flight would. Many mantises also have an auditory thoracic organ that helps them avoid bats by detecting their echolocation calls and responding evasively.[29][30]

text: Diet and predation

text: Mantises are generalist predators of arthropods.[2] The majority of mantises are ambush predators that only feed upon live prey within their reach. They either camouflage themselves and remain stationary, waiting for prey to approach, or stalk their prey with slow, stealthy movements.[31] Larger mantises sometimes eat smaller individuals of their own species,[32] as well as small vertebrates such as lizards, frogs, and small birds.[33][34]

text: Most mantises stalk tempting prey if it strays close enough, and will go further when they are especially hungry.[35] Once within reach, mantises strike rapidly to grasp the prey with their spiked raptorial forelegs.[36] Some ground and bark species pursue their prey in a more active way. For example, members of a few genera such as the ground mantises, Entella, Ligaria, and Ligariella run over dry ground seeking prey, much as tiger beetles do.[18]

text: The fore gut of some species extends the whole length of the insect and can be used to store prey for digestion later. This may be advantageous in an insect that feeds intermittently.[37] Chinese mantises live longer, grow faster, and produce more young when they are able to eat pollen.[38]

text: Antipredator adaptations

text: Mantises are preyed on by vertebrates such as frogs, lizards, and birds, and by invertebrates such as spiders, large species of hornets, and ants.[39] Some hunting wasps, such as some species of Tachytes also paralyse some species of mantis to feed their young.[40] Generally, mantises protect themselves by camouflage, most species being cryptically colored to resemble foliage or other backgrounds, both to avoid predators and to better snare their prey.[41] Those that live on uniformly colored surfaces such as bare earth or tree bark are dorsoventrally flattened so as to eliminate shadows that might reveal their presence.[42] The species from different families called flower mantises are aggressive mimics: they resemble flowers convincingly enough to attract prey that come to collect pollen and nectar.[43][44][45] Some species in Africa and Australia are able to turn black after a molt towards the end of the dry season; at this time of year, bush fires occur and this coloration enables them to blend in with the fire-ravaged landscape (fire melanism).[42]

text: When directly threatened, many mantis species stand tall and spread their forelegs, with their wings fanning out wide. The fanning of the wings makes the mantis seem larger and more threatening, with some species enhancing this effect with bright colors and patterns on their hind wings and inner surfaces of their front legs. If harassment persists, a mantis may strike with its forelegs and attempt to pinch or bite. As part of the bluffing (deimatic) threat display, some species may also produce a hissing sound by expelling air from the abdominal spiracles. Mantises lack chemical protection, so their displays are largely bluff. When flying at night, at least some mantises are able to detect the echolocation sounds produced by bats; when the frequency begins to increase rapidly, indicating an approaching bat, they stop flying horizontally and begin a descending spiral toward the safety of the ground, often preceded by an aerial loop or spin. If caught, they may slash captors with their raptorial legs.[42][46][47]

text: Mantises, like stick insects, show rocking behavior in which the insect makes rhythmic, repetitive side-to-side movements. Functions proposed for this behavior include the enhancement of crypsis by means of the resemblance to vegetation moving in the wind. However, the repetitive swaying movements may be most important in allowing the insects to discriminate objects from the background by their relative movement, a visual mechanism typical of animals with simpler sight systems. Rocking movements by these generally sedentary insects may replace flying or running as a source of relative motion of objects in the visual field.[48] As ants may be predators of mantises, genera such as Loxomantis, Orthodera, and Statilia, like many other arthropods, avoid attacking them. Exploiting this behavior, a variety of arthropods, including some early-instar mantises, mimic ants to evade their predators.[49]

text:
Leaf mimicry: Choeradodis has leaf-like fore wings and a widened green thorax.

Adult female Iris oratoria performs a bluffing threat display, rearing back with the forelegs and wings spread and mouth opened.

The jeweled flower mantis, Creobroter gemmatus: the brightly colored wings are opened suddenly in a deimatic display to startle predators.

Some mantis nymphs mimic ants to avoid predators.

tag: ul

text: Reproduction and life history

text: The mating season in temperate climates typically takes place in autumn,[50][51] while in tropical areas, mating can occur at any time of the year.[51] To mate following courtship, the male usually leaps onto the female's back, clasping her thorax and wing bases with his forelegs. He then arches his abdomen to deposit and store sperm in a special chamber near the tip of the female's abdomen. The female lays between 10 and 400 eggs, depending on the species. Eggs are typically deposited in a froth mass-produced by glands in the abdomen. This froth hardens, creating a protective capsule, which together with the egg mass is called an ootheca. Depending on the species, the ootheca can be attached to a flat surface, wrapped around a plant, or even deposited in the ground. Despite the versatility and durability of the eggs, they are often preyed on, especially by several species of parasitoid wasps. In a few species, mostly ground and bark mantises in the family Tarachodidae, the mother guards the eggs.[50] The cryptic Tarachodes maurus positions herself on bark with her abdomen covering her egg capsule, ambushing passing prey and moving very little until the eggs hatch.[4] An unusual reproductive strategy is adopted by Brunner's stick mantis from the southern United States; no males have ever been found in this species, and the females breed parthenogenetically.[2] The ability to reproduce by parthenogenesis has been recorded in at least two other species, Sphodromantis viridis and Miomantis sp., although these species usually reproduce sexually.[52][53][54] In temperate climates, adults do not survive the winter and the eggs undergo a diapause, hatching in the spring.[5]

text: As in closely related insect groups in the superorder Dictyoptera, mantises go through three life stages: egg, nymph, and adult (mantises are among the hemimetabolous insects). For smaller species, the eggs may hatch in 3–4 weeks as opposed to 4–6 weeks for larger species. The nymphs may be colored differently from the adult, and the early stages are often mimics of ants. A mantis nymph grows bigger as it molts its exoskeleton. Molting can happen five to 10 times before the adult stage is reached, depending on the species. After the final molt, most species have wings, though some species remain wingless or brachypterous ("short-winged"), particularly in the female sex. The lifespan of a mantis depends on the species; smaller ones may live 4–8 weeks, while larger species may live 4–6 months.[2][19]

text:
Mantis religiosa mating (brown male, green female)

Stagmomantis carolina laying ootheca

Recently laid M. religiosa ootheca

Hatching from the ootheca

text: Sexual cannibalism

text: Sexual cannibalism is common among most predatory species of mantises in captivity. It has sometimes been observed in natural populations, where about a quarter of male-female encounters result in the male being eaten by the female.[55][56][57] Around 90% of the predatory species of mantises participate in sexual cannibalism.[58] Adult males typically outnumber females at first, but their numbers may be fairly equivalent later in the adult stage,[5] possibly because females selectively eat the smaller males.[59] In Tenodera sinensis, 83% of males escape cannibalism after an encounter with a female, but since multiple matings occur, the probability of a male's being eaten increases cumulatively.[56]

text: The female may begin feeding by biting off the male's head (as they do with regular prey), and if mating has begun, the male's movements may become even more vigorous in its delivery of sperm. Early researchers thought that because copulatory movement is controlled by a ganglion in the abdomen, not the head, removal of the male's head was a reproductive strategy by females to enhance fertilization while obtaining sustenance. Later, this behavior appeared to be an artifact of intrusive laboratory observation. Whether the behavior is natural in the field or also the result of distractions caused by the human observer remains controversial. Mantises are highly visual organisms and notice any disturbance in the laboratory or field, such as bright lights or moving scientists. Chinese mantises that had been fed ad libitum (so that they were not hungry) actually displayed elaborate courtship behavior when left undisturbed. The male engages the female in a courtship dance, to change her interest from feeding to mating.[60] Under such circumstances, the female has been known to respond with a defensive deimatic display by flashing the colored eyespots on the inside of her front legs.[61]

text: The reason for sexual cannibalism has been debated; experiments show that females on low quality diets have a higher chance to engage in sexual cannibalism compared to females on high quality diets.[62] Some consider that submissive males gain a selective advantage by producing offspring. This theory is supported by a quantifiable increase in the duration of copulation among males which are cannibalized, in some cases doubling both the duration and the chance of fertilization. This is contrasted by a study where males were seen to approach hungry females with more caution, and were shown to remain mounted on hungry females for a longer time, indicating that males that actively avoid cannibalism may mate with multiple females. The same study also found that hungry females generally attracted fewer males than those that were well fed.[63] The act of dismounting after copulation is dangerous for males, for at this time, females most frequently cannibalize their mates. An increase in mounting duration appears to indicate that males wait for an opportune time to dismount a hungry female, who would be likely to cannibalize her mate.[61]

text: Relationship with humans

text: In literature and art

text: One of the earliest mantis references is in the ancient Chinese dictionary Erya, which gives its attributes in poetry, where it represents courage and fearlessness, and a brief description. A later text, the Jingshi Zhenglei Daguan Bencao ("Great History of Medical Material Annotated and Arranged by Types, Based upon the Classics and Historical Works") from 1108, gives accurate details of the construction of the egg packages, the development cycle, anatomy, and the function of the antennae. Although mantises are rarely mentioned in Ancient Greek sources, a female mantis in threat posture is accurately illustrated on a series of fifth-century BC silver coins, including didrachms, from Metapontum in Sicily.[64] In the 10th century AD, Byzantine era Adages, Suidas describes an insect resembling a slow-moving green locust with long front legs.[65] He translates Zenobius 2.94 with the words seriphos (maybe a mantis) and graus, an old woman, implying a thin, dried-up stick of a body.[66]

text: Western descriptions of the biology and morphology of the mantises became more accurate in the 18th century. Roesel von Rosenhof illustrated and described mantises and their cannibalistic behavior in the Insekten-Belustigungen (Insect Entertainments).[67]

text: Aldous Huxley made philosophical observations about the nature of death while two mantises mated in the sight of two characters in his 1962 novel Island (the species was Gongylus gongylodes). The naturalist Gerald Durrell's humorously autobiographical 1956 book My Family and Other Animals includes a four-page account of an almost evenly matched battle between a mantis and a gecko. Shortly before the fatal dénouement, Durrell narrates:

text: he [Geronimo the gecko] crashed into the mantis and made her reel, and grabbed the underside of her thorax in his jaws. Cicely [the mantis] retaliated by snapping both her front legs shut on Geronimo's hindlegs. They rustled and staggered across the ceiling and down the wall, each seeking to gain some advantage.[68]

text: M. C. Escher's woodcut Dream depicts a human-sized mantis standing on a sleeping bishop.[69] The 1957 film The Deadly Mantis features a mantis as a giant monster.

text: A cultural trope imagines the female mantis as a femme fatale. The idea is propagated in cartoons by Cable, Guy and Rodd, LeLievre, T. McCracken, and Mark Parisi, among others.[70][71][72][73] It ends Isabella Rossellini's short film about the life of a praying mantis in her 2008 Green Porno season for the Sundance Channel.[74][75]

text: Martial arts

text: Two martial arts separately developed in China have movements and fighting strategies based on those of the mantis.[76][77] As one of these arts was developed in northern China, and the other in southern parts of the country, the arts are nowadays referred to (both in English and Chinese) as 'Northern Praying Mantis'[78] and 'Southern Praying Mantis'.[77] Both are very popular in China, and have also been exported to the West in recent decades.[77][78][79][80]

text: In mythology and religion

text: The mantis was revered by the southern African Khoi and San in whose cultures man and nature were intertwined; for its praying posture, the mantis was even named Hottentotsgot ("god of the Khoi") in the Afrikaans language that had developed among the first European settlers.[81] However, at least for the San, the mantis was only one of the manifestations of a trickster-deity who could assume many other forms, such as a snake, hare or vulture.[82] Several ancient civilizations did consider the insect to have supernatural powers; for the Greeks, it had the ability to show lost travelers the way home; in the Ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead the "bird-fly" is a minor god that leads the souls of the dead to the underworld; in a list of 9th-century BC Nineveh grasshoppers (buru), the mantis is named necromancer (buru-enmeli) and soothsayer (buru-enmeli-ashaga).[67][83]

text: As pets

text: Mantises are among the insects most widely kept as pets.[84][85] Because the lifespan of a mantis is only about a year, people who want to keep mantises often breed them. In 2013 at least 31 species were kept and bred in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and the United States.[86] In 1996 at least 50 species were known to be kept in captivity by members of the Mantis Study Group.[87] The Independent described the "giant Asian praying mantis" as "part stick insect with a touch of Buddhist monk",[88] and stated that they needed a vivarium around 30 cm (12 in) on each side.[88] The Daily South argued that a pet insect was no weirder than a pet rat or ferret, and that while a pet mantis was unusual, it would not "bark, shed, [or] need shots or a litter box".[89]

text: For pest control

text: Gardeners who prefer to avoid pesticides may encourage mantises in the hope of controlling insect pests.[90] However, mantises do not have key attributes of biological pest control agents; they do not specialize in a single pest insect, and do not multiply rapidly in response to an increase in such a prey species, but are general predators.[90] They eat whatever they can catch, including both harmful and beneficial insects.[89] They therefore have "negligible value" in biological control.[90]

text: Two species, the Chinese mantis and the European mantis, were deliberately introduced to North America in the hope that they would serve as pest controls for agriculture; they have spread widely in both the United States and Canada.[91]

text: Mantis-like robot

text: A prototype robot inspired by the forelegs of the praying mantis has front legs that allow the robot to walk, climb steps, and grasp objects. The multi-jointed leg provides dexterity via a rotatable joint. Future models may include a more spiked foreleg to improve the grip and ability to support more weight.[92]