NJTRailfan wrote:Which one of the two were the better stadium and does anyone have a picture of Polo Grounds from the outside? I can only find the diamond pic of Polo.
GOING OFF-TOPIC TO ANSWER THE QUESTION
There are various ballpark websites on the internet that have pictures of both the Polo Grounds and Ebbets Field. Just do a search for "Polo Grounds" or "Ebbets Field". Ebbets Field was probably considered by most to be the superior baseball facility, though the Polo Grounds was more unique and much larger.
The Polo Grounds was an elongated, bathtub-like facility that was laid out much more ideally for football than baseball. Its design created a lot of foul territory behind home plate, very short dimensions down the lines, and very long dimensions to the power alleys and center field. (NOTE: the version of the Polo Grounds most people are familiar with was actually the fourth stadium to have that name. Also, polo was never played on a regular basis at the "final" version of the Polo Grounds.) You could also see Yankee Stadium from inside the Polo Grounds (and vice-versa, though you had to look out from behind home plate in Yankee Stadium); the two ballparks were less than 1 mile apart on opposite sides of the Harlem River.
Ebbets Field was a classic ballpark that in some ways resembled Shibe Park in Philadelphia and Forbes Field in Pittsburgh, two parks opened 4 years before Ebbets Field. In its "classic" (final) form (1932-1957), it was a very hitter-friendly park with short dimensions to pretty much all fields.
Finally, getting back on topic, as you may have guessed based on the location description above, the Polo Grounds was located near the current 155th Street stop for the B/D Trains (to the north) and the 155th Street stop for the C Train (to the northeast).