Six World Series, Zero Grass: The Artificial Turf Era of October Baseball

Grass stains used to be a badge of honor in baseball’s postseason. But over the years, as technology and team economics evolved, so did the fields themselves. And on six unique occasions, the World Series has unfolded entirely on artificial turf.

No dirt and no blades of grass. These Series proceeded on synthetic fibers and rubber pellets — with baseball’s most prized trophy at stake.

When October Turned Synthetic

The first fully turf-based World Series came in 1980, when the Philadelphia Phillies and Kansas City Royals squared off at Veterans Stadium and Royals Stadium, respectively. Both featured AstroTurf — the unforgiving kind that played more like concrete than grass.

It wasn’t a one-off.

Throughout the 1980s and early 1990s, artificial turf became a symbol of “modern” baseball. It was cost-effective, required no sunlight, and withstood weather extremes — making it a favorite for domed stadiums and northern franchises.

Here are the six World Series played entirely on synthetic turf (with the winner listed first):

• 1980: Phillies (Veterans Stadium) vs. Royals (Royals Stadium)
• 1985: Royals (Royals Stadium) vs. Cardinals (Busch Stadium)
• 1987: Twins (Metrodome) vs. Cardinals (Busch Stadium)
• 1993: Blue Jays (SkyDome) vs. Phillies (Veterans Stadium)
• 2020: Dodgers vs. Rays (Globe Life Field as a neutral site)
• 2023: Rangers (Globe Life Field) vs. Diamondbacks (Chase Field)

These games unfolded under artificial skies on artificial turf — baseball’s most natural game played in its most unnatural setting.

The Toll on Bodies: Andre Dawson’s Warning

One player who paid the price for turf’s rise was Andre Dawson. Known for his explosiveness and five-tool brilliance in the early 1980s, Dawson saw his athleticism slowly eroded by the rock-hard artificial turf at Montreal’s Olympic Stadium. His knees became a cautionary tale.

“It took a toll on my body, no doubt,” Dawson once said. “It shortened my prime.”

He wasn’t alone. Many outfielders who spent their careers chasing balls on the unforgiving carpet — especially at places like the Vet, the Metrodome, and Busch Stadium — came away with shortened careers and chronic pain.

New Turf, Same Questions

Today’s synthetic surfaces are more advanced — designed to mimic grass more closely, with improved shock absorption and flexibility. But concerns linger.

Several MLB teams still opt to rest their star players when traveling to turf-heavy ballparks like Toronto’s Rogers Centre or Tampa Bay’s Tropicana Field. Some managers don’t want their elite infielders diving on artificial surfaces. Some sluggers get scheduled DH days to save their knees.

It’s a silent admission: while safer than the old stuff, turf still raises red flags.

So Why Does It Persist?

Turf offers logistical advantages: fewer rainouts, lower maintenance costs, and flexibility for multi-use venues. For franchises with indoor stadiums or challenging climates — like Arizona and Texas — it makes sense.

And yet, watching a World Series game without blades of grass feels … off. Turf bounces are different. Sliding doesn’t look the same. Even the color feels more “manufactured” than “majestic.”

What’s Lost — and What Might Return

The six turf-only World Series are footnotes in a larger conversation about the soul of the sport. As more franchises switch back to natural grass, it’s worth asking:

What makes baseball feel like baseball?

For purists, it’s the dirt under your cleats. The grass stains on your pants. The idea that the game should be played on the kind of field you grew up with — not something you roll out like a carpet.

As October approaches, and postseason dreams come alive again, here’s hoping the field underfoot brings out the best in the players — not the worst.